Santorum, a devout Catholic, was lucky that he access to non-Catholic hospitals, unlike many families that face this horrible choice and are denied options at Catholics facilities.

Anonymous wrote:A Washington Post article quotes Santorum directly, which is also take from a book they wrote:

The story is well known. In October 1996, Karen Santorum underwent surgery to try to fix a fatal malfunction in the kidneys of the fetus. After the operation, she contracted an infection and she and her husband, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum (Pa.), were faced with a terrible choice: End the pregnancy or lose the mother.

“Rick cried and spoke to me softly,” writes Karen in her 1998 book, “Letters to Gabriel.” He spoke of their three living children. “They can’t live without their mother. Karen, you make our lives complete — please, it’s time — I love you so much.”

Karen took medicine that induced labor.

This - they've been very clear that they knew that the steps they were taking would end in the death of the fetus. By any definition, this was an abortion to save the life of the mother. Which is one reason why I find his positions on abortion so appalling - they were just like many, many women/couples in this country who have had to make a heartbreaking decision. Yet they seem to think theirs was a special case, or an exception, so not really an "abortion." And he touts the survival of his daughter with Trisomy, but as several articles have pointed out, they've been very lucky, and have had access to excellent medical care that most Americans don't. He just makes me angry.

As for the Personhood Amendment - there's a strongly hard-right, social conservative element in parts of VA outside of NOVA that have benefited from the state's slight shift to the right since Obama's election. There was a delegate who wanted to introduce legislation requiring women who miscarried to report it (in case it *might* have actually been an abortion). That one, thankfully, never gained traction. But simply that these ideas are being introduced and taken seriously by the legislature should frighten women.

And, by the way, this is the same state legislature that is in the process of changing adoption rules so that state-funded agencies can opt out of letting gay/lesbian singles adopt, already doesn't allow gays/lesbians to adopt their partner's children, and wants to limit fostering by gay/lesbian parents. I really like living where we do in VA, but there are aspects of the state that drive me nuts - this stuff being the most recent, shining examples.

I just read about this on here and Googled the topic.

WTF?? DH hadn't even heard about this either. Why isn't this getting more press?

17:25 - I am so sorry for your loss and found myself in a similar situation a few years ago. It was the most difficult, heart wrenching decision I had to make and like you, not a day goes by that I don't miss what never came to be or regret that I was faced with such a challenge. No one should be making decisions that affect a women's reproductive system except for a woman with information and support from her loved ones and physician.

I read the floor speech from the nitwit who later apologized for making light of such a personal decision. Right, let's see today I am going to go get my nails done, maybe get a coffee and while I am out I'll just swing by the clinic and get an abortion. While there may be women who do not think too hard, that is certainly the exception rather than the rule. It's never a light decision and even more challenging when faced with a fatal diagnosis that has health implications for the mother. Had I gone forward there were too many what ifs - and one of those was my fertility! I am just so thankful that despite the fact that I had to go to a clinic out of state, I was treated kindly and with respect. I was not "forced" to view the ultrasound as that would have put me over the edge.
I spent a year following that event in therapy and while I do have a child, I will always carry this loss with me and continue to mourn.
To the insensitive individuals posting - until you walk in someone else's shoes don't be so quick to judge. Would you have a similar response if you were diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy?
It is a private matter and I was so blessed to be surrounded by support and love from both my husband and my family/friends.

A Washington Post article quotes Santorum directly, which is also take from a book they wrote:

The story is well known. In October 1996, Karen Santorum underwent surgery to try to fix a fatal malfunction in the kidneys of the fetus. After the operation, she contracted an infection and she and her husband, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum (Pa.), were faced with a terrible choice: End the pregnancy or lose the mother.

“Rick cried and spoke to me softly,” writes Karen in her 1998 book, “Letters to Gabriel.” He spoke of their three living children. “They can’t live without their mother. Karen, you make our lives complete — please, it’s time — I love you so much.”

Karen took medicine that induced labor.

Anonymous wrote:I guess most of you couldn't stomach seeing a non living being in your stomach before you abort it. Reap what you sow.

How about a mutant? A genetic misfire that won't survive? Or a creature who has no higher function because its brain has liquefied in utero? These bills will give such creatures priority over a mother who is likely grieving for the fact that that creature is not the baby of her hopes and dreams. She doesn't need to see an ultrasound to know what she is losing.


If you have had ended or lost a pregnancy because of a genetic problem or other physical problems, please forgive my language. The holier than thou types who haven't experienced this can't imagine what it is like to be told your pregnancy that you very much wanted is going to end badly, one way or the other.

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/06/karen_santorum_did_not_have_an_abortion/

This is the piece that I read, which seemed pretty balanced, although, as they point out in the article, we don't have the information to really know the truth about the situation.

Anonymous wrote:It's harder to look into the eye of someone and kill them same goes with seeing the unborn baby

Trust me, by the time she gets to the clinic, she's seen that collection of cells more than once.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why it hasn't gotten more press. They terminated at around 19 weeks because there was an infection with the fetus that threatened the life of the mother. So they induced labor and delivered, which resulted in a still birth (or death shortly after). I suppose he justifies this to himself that because this was an indirection action it doesn't "count" as a termination. But as someone who terminated at 14 weeks (via D&C) due to a chromosome abnormality, I see no difference in what I did and what they did. The intent and the outcome were the same.

As I understood it, she developed an infection in her uterus and was given a large dose of antibiotics. Doctors urged her to induce, but she went into labor before having to make that choice. I absolutely loathe Santorum and I find if difficult to believe that two people who have gone through such heartbreaking experiences would think that that they know what the right choices should be for everyone else, however, I think it's inaccurate to say that she terminated a pregnancy.

I don't feel like googling around, but i also understood that she terminated. Either way; you'd think a terrible experience like that might grant him some empathy or other human emotion. Besides arrogance, which he clearly has in order to wish to impose his religion on us all.

Anonymous wrote:Not sure why it hasn't gotten more press. They terminated at around 19 weeks because there was an infection with the fetus that threatened the life of the mother. So they induced labor and delivered, which resulted in a still birth (or death shortly after). I suppose he justifies this to himself that because this was an indirection action it doesn't "count" as a termination. But as someone who terminated at 14 weeks (via D&C) due to a chromosome abnormality, I see no difference in what I did and what they did. The intent and the outcome were the same.

As I understood it, she developed an infection in her uterus and was given a large dose of antibiotics. Doctors urged her to induce, but she went into labor before having to make that choice. I absolutely loathe Santorum and I find if difficult to believe that two people who have gone through such heartbreaking experiences would think that that they know what the right choices should be for everyone else, however, I think it's inaccurate to say that she terminated a pregnancy.

Not sure why it hasn't gotten more press. They terminated at around 19 weeks because there was an infection with the fetus that threatened the life of the mother. So they induced labor and delivered, which resulted in a still birth (or death shortly after). I suppose he justifies this to himself that because this was an indirection action it doesn't "count" as a termination. But as someone who terminated at 14 weeks (via D&C) due to a chromosome abnormality, I see no difference in what I did and what they did. The intent and the outcome were the same.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess most of you couldn't stomach seeing a non living being in your stomach before you abort it. Reap what you sow.

That's not the main issue, what if the mother's life is at stake? What if she's going to die in a short order if they don't take out the baby. Is the doctor going to have to get her case "reviewed" by a non-medical "ethics" board? All that time could end up costing 2 lives.

And let's note that Rick Santorum faced this issue and they chose to terminate a pregnancy when his wife's life was at stake. Which is why I find his stance on this issue so hypocritical.

Wait, WHAT? Seriously? How come this isn't getting more media coverage? I didn't know his wife terminated at any point, I assumed she had never terminated, given that they have a trisomy 18 child. For lack of a better phrase: holy shit.

GET YOUR RELIGIONS OUT OF MY GOVERNMENT!!! They belong in your hearts, not in my life.

Wow. This Personhood amendment has me revved up for the first time to get involved in keeping laws out of pregnant women's bodies. I understand the differences of opinion about pregnancy, the line of when a developing baby/fetus/embryo has rights for themselves, but this is just WAY too far.

I don't like living in a theocracy. I decide which church, if any, to go to, thank you very much.

Thanks for the links. I'm going to start calling my friends to get more involved in this, spread the word. This is coo-coo.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guess most of you couldn't stomach seeing a non living being in your stomach before you abort it. Reap what you sow.

That's not the main issue, what if the mother's life is at stake? What if she's going to die in a short order if they don't take out the baby. Is the doctor going to have to get her case "reviewed" by a non-medical "ethics" board? All that time could end up costing 2 lives.

And let's note that Rick Santorum faced this issue and they chose to terminate a pregnancy when his wife's life was at stake. Which is why I find his stance on this issue so hypocritical.