How many actual “late term” terminations actually happen? Actual reasons?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

That’s not what the thread title says.

But at any rate it’s easy enough to take the numbers 350-600 a year and extrapolate that between half to three quarters or more are medically necessary to find a ballpark number for “elective” ones: 87/175 - 125/300.

This would be my guess too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

[Anonymous]

Thank you to the PPs who recommended the documentary After Tiller. It was a really really powerful look at the 4 sole doctors that perform 3rd trimester abortions. None of these women are just going through this for funsies.

For anyone interested, you can find it for free on Tubi.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

Did you read the linked study from the lady who talked to 3rd trimester abortion recipients? There is no universal data collection on these things I work on a cancer screening and prevention program for underinsured and uninsured women, and it takes lots of money and funding to collect and process the data you are asking for.

The biggest hump to collecting this data is that all abortion providers after the 3rd trimester are private businesses. Any federal insurance- whether for employees or for those who receive medicaid/medicare- does not allow for use of the insurance to receive an abortion (AT ANY STAGE!) which would be the easiest way to track and extrapolate the data you seem obsessed with.

Improving access to healthcare- including abortions- for all women would decrease the statistically insignificant number of 3rd trimester abortions to begin with. Finding out you are pregnant sooner and being able to access care effectively and quickly are literally the determinants to when abortions occur. Funds are also a huge determining factor. If you have to come up with 1k because you have to pay OOP, its not happening.

Just clarifying that ALL abortion providers are private businesses not just 3rd trimester. My understanding is they cant be compelled to provide that data, even if the CDC wanted to collect it due to privacy but someone with a law degree can correct me if necessary.

Thank you, and I think this is an important point here (I’m the OP btw).

I agreed with someone on page 2 or so who posited probably no one is keeping track of the numbers, so there probably is no clear answer.

I was still hoping maybe someone knew, or had a reliable data-set for an accurate estimate. But your point is well-taken and AGAIN: I agree:

- it does not appear the number is available because no one is keeping track (not even the CDC).

And since we all agree this is a private matter between the person having the abortion and their doctor (again - I AM pro choice), my thought is: it’s probably impossible and maybe better that the government is not keeping track. I believe we should keep it that way.

However, not knowing the number of elective 3rd trimester terminations people are having leaves the debate more open to emotional arguments (from both sides).

I’ve asked repeatedly to keep politics out of this. Unfortunately, politics benefits when we can’t even nail down the facts.

Thanks to those who have at least tried to illuminate the issue, so people can make their own choices (and have I mentioned I’m pro choice yet?).

Hon. Hon.

We do know how many elective third trimester abortions there are: zero.

Flat out false. Here’s one example from the Kimport survey: “When Veronica presented for her abortion appointment, the ultrasound worker determined that she was 25 weeks pregnant. Veronica needed an abortion in the third trimester because the fact that she was pregnant was new information to her when she was already 25 weeks pregnant.”

One person is statistically zero.

It also seems like there's probably some backstory there. She needed it because it was a surprise. And that's a problem because...she's been drinking a pint of vodka a night for the whole pregnancy. She's a drug addict. She's a prostitute who lives on the streets...etc. I honestly don't think just "surprised" would meet the bar for providers.

[Anonymous]

Don’t worry op!
Project 2025 has got this covered!
How dare women keep their private reasons for seeking abortion care a mystery!
We DEMAND ANSWERS!
And with project 2025 we will finally have them!
Moving forward no woman will have a right to privacy when they seek reprodu… oops I forgot! Those pesky words “reproductive health” are banned. That’s right! No talk that highlights that an actual sentient human matters in any of these scenarios. Fetuses come first!
So…. Moving forward the government will get all of the data on exactly who is getting an abortion and when! Privacy schmimacy! WHO needs it? What could possibly be the harm?

But don’t take my word for it. Just give a skim over the Project 2025 handbook and specifically the Health and human services section 14. SO MUCH OF IT IS DEDICATED TO ABORTION.
Because squeezing out babies is all you’re here for.
😉

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

Everyone is calling OP a she but when you read OP's posts collectively you get the distinct impression OP is one of those "well actually" men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

Everyone is calling OP a she but when you read OP's posts collectively you get the distinct impression OP is one of those "well actually" men.

Very much this.

[Anonymous]

Oh look here’s the exact passage and can be found of page 455. Enjoy!


Data Collection. The CDC's abortion surveillance and maternity mortality reporting systems are woefully inadequate. CDC abortion data are reported by states on a voluntary basis, and California, Maryland, and New Hampshire do not submit abortion data at all. Accurate and reliable statistical data about abortion, abortion survivors, and abortion-related maternal deaths are essential to timely, reliable public health and policy analysis.
Because liberal states have now become sanctuaries for abortion tourism, HHS should use every available tool, including the cutting of funds, to ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother's state of residence, and by what method. It should also ensure that statistics are separated by category: spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion. In addition, CDC should require monitoring and reporting for complications due to abortion and every instance of children being born alive after an abortion. Moreover, abortion should be clearly defined as only those procedures that intentionally end an unborn child's life. Miscarriage management or standard ectopic pregnancy treatments should never be conflated with abortion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

That’s not what the thread title says.

But at any rate it’s easy enough to take the numbers 350-600 a year and extrapolate that between half to three quarters or more are medically necessary to find a ballpark number for “elective” ones: 87/175 - 125/300.

This would be my guess too.

This seems to be the most accurate estimate:

“That’s not what the thread title says.

But at any rate it’s easy enough to take the numbers 350-600 a year and extrapolate that between half to three quarters or more are medically necessary to find a ballpark number for “elective” ones: 87/175 - 125/300.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

Do you understand the peer review process of scientific journal? This is standard. Why are you suggesting this publication would be any less verified than their other research - because you are uncomfortable with the women’s words?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

Do you understand the peer review process of scientific journal? This is standard. Why are you suggesting this publication would be any less verified than their other research - because you are uncomfortable with the women’s words?

No. I’m extremely well aquatinted with the pro life movement. Please look up Abby Johnson. It’s is not a movement grounded in logic, data or the truth.
So it’s lovely that someone wanted to do a study in good faith re: women’s reasons for third trimester abortions, but if they didn’t adequately account for a percentage of people that are motivated by religious zealotry with no compunction to lie to achieve their goals, then… it’s a worthless study.
And the prolife moment has worked 40 years to force their agenda and that included judges lying before congress under oath.
So again. The study isn’t worth anything.
Women get third trimester abortions because their health or the health of the fetus demand it.
The end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

Do you understand the peer review process of scientific journal? This is standard. Why are you suggesting this publication would be any less verified than their other research - because you are uncomfortable with the women’s words?

No. I’m extremely well aquatinted with the pro life movement. Please look up Abby Johnson. It’s is not a movement grounded in logic, data or the truth.
So it’s lovely that someone wanted to do a study in good faith re: women’s reasons for third trimester abortions, but if they didn’t adequately account for a percentage of people that are motivated by religious zealotry with no compunction to lie to achieve their goals, then… it’s a worthless study.
And the prolife moment has worked 40 years to force their agenda and that included judges lying before congress under oath.
So again. The study isn’t worth anything.
Women get third trimester abortions because their health or the health of the fetus demand it.
The end.

The publication isn’t pro life, it’s Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. The authors made the case for increased and earlier access in the media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If half of abortions occurring in the second trimester, after 20 weeks, are the result of not having the funds to get an abortion, then you definitely aren’t paying for a 20,000 plus procedure in the third trimester.

This is the real issue. People are getting abortions late for reasons OTHER than birth defects or health of mother.

OP again. This is the claim I’d like to fact-check.

How many third-trimester terminations are for reasons OTHER THAN birth defects or physical health of the mother?

No has answered that yet.

DP I think the simple answer to your question is that nobody knows because nobody is keeping track of this data.

OP again. Thx.

Sadly, people littered this thread with political statements even after I said not to. And while some information has been shared (thx again), we still do not have facts, which makes debating this kinda pointless.

My guess is you are probably right: no one is keeping track of this data.

If so, there really is no reliable answer to my question: how many third-trimester terminations are purely elective.

Unless someone can post some actual data in answer to my question, there’s no longer much point to anyone posting (again: stop posting political responses! This is about ascertaining basic facts. That’s all).

Heres my thing OP. Your obsession with elective is clouding the fact there are REAL reasons to have a 3rd trimester abortion. And by focusing on elective, which OB/GYNs dont do in 3rd trimester, you take from women who are experiencing real pain and loss. Its grotesque. And you WANT to find elective people so that you can say well if there are 4 people having elective abortions then no one should get it because deep down you dont actually agree with abortion.

People dont have 25-35k and weeks off. Every fed employee who has fed insurance wouldnt be able to get it covered and is unable to get any abortion covered.

And people who want an elective abortion will find a back alley provider or conduct infanticide. You arent thinking rationally. Rationally, someone who wants to abort a fetus- ELECTIVELY- will find a way to do it or will kill an unwanted child because no one grows a fetus in their belly and electively says No, put me under, kill a healthy child, heres 30k plus 1-2 weeks to recover.

Theres your rational answer and facts.

Your response is NOT a factual response to the request for mathematical data this thread is premised upon.

Why couldn’t you simply have said: “I do not know the answer. Here’s my opinion?”

And furthermore, you don’t know me. My sibling had an abortion. My ex had an abortion. I offered to accompany a close friend to her scheduled PP appointment and promised to hold her hand during a termination and help get her through it (she miscarried prior to the appt though).

Why do so many of you fail to read / comprehend ? I AM PRO CHOICE!!

What I’m asking is a simple FACTUAL question about 3rd Trimester / 27 weeks-numbers, WITHOUT politics, but instead all I get is opinions and politics.

If you don’t know, don’t post.

You have gotten plenty of answers on that. Why don’t you respond to them?

So: you don’t know the answer.

Why did you respond to a question with a question? Still no data?

Why did you ignore this post?

“KFF:

While very limited contemporary data exists on this issue, a study from 1992 estimated 0.02% of all abortions occurred after 26 weeks gestation (320 to 600 cases per year).

https://www.kff.org/women...dobbs-era/“

Because shes asking for elective. The data you provided likely includes elective and medically necessary.

And why is the cdc link on page 8 being ignored?

But more to the point, why does OP not understand that “purely elective” abortions don’t really happen late in a pregnancy? Why not comprehend that it’s just not a thing?

Because it’s not true. Multiple surveys have been posted here in which women are explaining their reasoning for obtaining elective third trimester abortions, including delays in receiving care/raising funds earlier.

That “study” is junk science. No attempt to verify information was done. It’s worthless.
We have rough numbers and the word of doctors who have taken the Hippocratic oath.

It was peer reviewed and published so…no. The fact that you don’t like the survey doesn’t make it worthless. No doctors have said that there are zero elective abortions.

I have no feelings either way. Can you post where their stories were corroborated, because I couldn’t find anything.

This was a medical journal Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, and you can look up their peer review policies online. Scientific journals go through a verification and peer review process prior to publication.

I’ve read the report. Please point out where any attempt to verify claims can be found. I’ll admit that I’ve skimmed it, but haven’t found it.

Do you understand the peer review process of scientific journal? This is standard. Why are you suggesting this publication would be any less verified than their other research - because you are uncomfortable with the women’s words?

No. I’m extremely well aquatinted with the pro life movement. Please look up Abby Johnson. It’s is not a movement grounded in logic, data or the truth.
So it’s lovely that someone wanted to do a study in good faith re: women’s reasons for third trimester abortions, but if they didn’t adequately account for a percentage of people that are motivated by religious zealotry with no compunction to lie to achieve their goals, then… it’s a worthless study.
And the prolife moment has worked 40 years to force their agenda and that included judges lying before congress under oath.
So again. The study isn’t worth anything.
Women get third trimester abortions because their health or the health of the fetus demand it.
The end.

The publication isn’t pro life, it’s Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. The authors made the case for increased and earlier access in the media.

Wonderful for them. Did they account for their research being F’d by pro life lying nut jobs?
Because at no point in the last 40 years has anyone on the left been prepared for how craven forced birth advocates actually are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Oh look here’s the exact passage and can be found of page 455. Enjoy!


Data Collection. The CDC's abortion surveillance and maternity mortality reporting systems are woefully inadequate. CDC abortion data are reported by states on a voluntary basis, and California, Maryland, and New Hampshire do not submit abortion data at all. Accurate and reliable statistical data about abortion, abortion survivors, and abortion-related maternal deaths are essential to timely, reliable public health and policy analysis.
Because liberal states have now become sanctuaries for abortion tourism, HHS should use every available tool, including the cutting of funds, to ensure that every state reports exactly how many abortions take place within its borders, at what gestational age of the child, for what reason, the mother's state of residence, and by what method. It should also ensure that statistics are separated by category: spontaneous miscarriage; treatments that incidentally result in the death of a child (such as chemotherapy); stillbirths; and induced abortion. In addition, CDC should require monitoring and reporting for complications due to abortion and every instance of children being born alive after an abortion. Moreover, abortion should be clearly defined as only those procedures that intentionally end an unborn child's life. Miscarriage management or standard ectopic pregnancy treatments should never be conflated with abortion.

Yeah look at that - they want to change MEDICAL TERMINOLOGY!! Because they can't stand that the term abortion is a medical one with a specific meaning of ending a pregnancy early, whether that is done by nature, accident, or intentionally. What a bunch of clowns. But dangerous clowns.