Prior to viability   This was mentioned just above but the before viability statement in the lead is not true doesnt match the full range of citations and probably most importantly isnt an accurate summary of the article per WPLEAD  Whilst a number of the referenced texts do include viability as a measure it seems that an equal amount dont and the article does discuss abortion post viability  In either case viability is not a fixed point in time apart from in a legal sense leading the inherent confusion of the article apparently not applying to the termination of a  wk pregnancy which could technically now be viable  Now in many cases late termination is due to foetal abnormality at the  week scan for instance and the article does cover this but for some reason there appears to be this POV in the lead    I have read the past talk and the last discussion of this in  a user laid out some very clear reasons why it wasnt appropriate but the talk just fizzled out with no real valid objections  I suggest that remove the mention of viability from the first sentence of the lead would be more accurate a better summary of the article and probably also more credible  OwainDavies  edited at