Women Should Lose Their Right to Abortion When the Fetus Reaches Viability

Thank you for accepting, con. I hope by agree you mean you agree and accept the terms of the debate which we are about to have. To elaborate on my main arguments, we as a country need to decide at what point the government should have a "compelling state interest" (terminology used under the doctrine of strict scrutiny) in preserving potential life, in this case the fetus or baby. Although there is no exact point during all pregnancies when viability begins, on average a fetus becomes viable around the 23rd week of gestation. Although at the 23rd week the chances of survival are relatively low (a modest 20-35%), a baby's chances for survival increases 3-4% per day between 23 and 24 weeks of gestation and about 2-3% per day between 24 and 26 weeks of gestation (http://www.spensershope.org...). Survival rates are 50 to 70 percent for babies born at 24 to 25 weeks, and more than 90 percent born at 26 to 27 weeks (multiple sources support these data). This high rate of survival of fetuses that have reached viability certainly creates a compelling state interest in preserving the potential life of the baby. It is easy to understand why a couple, or a single woman, would want to get an abortion this late in her pregnancy, if the baby would be born with severe disabilities, deformities, or diseases that would only lead to pain, suffering, and death. In this case, the government could still maintain the right to allow the woman to have an abortion. A simple appeal could be made by the woman, supported by the opinion of a medical expert, and together they could determine it is less cruel to abort. However, an abortion to prevent suffering is typically not the case. In a 1995 speech at a National Abortion Federation Convention in New Orleans, George Tiller said, "We have some experience with late terminations; about 10,000 patients between 24 and 36 weeks and something like 800 fetal anomalies between 26 and 36 weeks in the past 5 years." Perhaps this was just a regional phenomenon, but Luhra Tivis had already confirmed the pattern in an article she wrote in 1994: "I witnessed evidence of the brutal, cold blooded murder of over 600 viable, healthy babies at seven, eight and nine months gestation. A very, very few of these babies, less than 2%, were handicapped[.] " I thought I was pro-choice and I was glad to be working in an abortion clinic. I thought I was helping provide a noble service to women in crisis. " I was instructed to falsify the age of the babies in medical records. I was required to lie to the mothers over the phone, as they scheduled their appointments, and to tell them that they were not "too far along" Then I had to note, in the records that Dr. Tiller"s needle had successfully pierced the walls of the baby"s heart, injecting the poison what brought death[.]" Clearly, the trend does not support that women are getting late pregnancy abortions to benefit the potential baby. The second major concern is the health of the woman receiving the abortion. Abortion is a fairly safe procedure for a woman. However, the procedure becomes much more dangerous the longer the woman waits: " One death per every 530,000 abortions if you are at eight weeks or less " One death per 17,000 abortions for pregnancies at 16"20 weeks " One death per 6,000 abortions at 21 weeks and more. (http://www.midlandlifecenter.org...) Just as we have a compelling interest in preserving the life of a viable fetus, we have a compelling interest in protecting the women involved. I am not trying to argue that there are no circumstances where a woman should be allowed to have an abortion after viability. However, the decision to abort should be based on the government's interest, at least one, possibly more, medical expert's opinion, and the woman. The medical expert(s) and the government must make an informed decision together to determine whether or not the fetus is truly viable and would not suffer upon childbirth, while protecting the woman from a relatively risky procedure. The government has a "compelling state interest" in protect all human life forms that have the potential to survive and; therefore, woman should not have the rights to abortion that they receive prior to fetal viability.