Talk:Abortion/First paragraph/Archive 5

message: An abortion is the expulsion or removal of an embryo or fetus from a uterus, caused by or resulting in its death. Abortion can occur spontaneously (miscarriage), or be intentionally induced through chemical, surgical, or other means which have been used historically. In the 20th century, the morality of induced abortion became the subject of intense mainstream debate in many parts of the world.
The word "abortion" is commonly used to mean any induced procedure that aims to terminate a pregnancy of any gestational age. Medically speaking, abortion is defined as any premature termination of a pregnancy before twenty weeks of gestation.
:Changed the 2nd death to "terminates"; merged historical sentence, female > uterus. Put in Andrew c "Medically speaking, moved commonly first and moved "20th century" to be with "historical" mention. Better flow. Replaced second refers with "defined as". So how's this version? - RoyBoy 800 01:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmmm... didn't we want to avoid the word "pregnancy"; as it is non-specific and may not be terminated with selected reduction etc. Or is having "a" in front sufficient to clarify a singular pregnancy is being terminated. Damnit, I thought I almost had it. - RoyBoy 800 01:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not perfect in my eyes (and I have a feeling I am very hard to please on this topic, :P), but I think it works. I personally see no problem with the word "pregnancy" because selective reductions are not "common" and you state specifically that you are talking "commonly". Furthermore, 'temination of pregnancy' is used by a majority of the cited definitions. My only concern would be what Severa raised awhile back about giving undue weight to viable/LTA. Her suggestion was to just say along the lines of "Abortion commonly refers to any induced procedure that aims to terminate a pregnancy of any gestational age".--Andrew c 02:04, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alrighty, and 20 should be twenty? - RoyBoy 800 02:07, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, in the first sentence it seems odd to split "removal of an embryo" with "from a uterus". I would rearrange the order of the sentence. And about 20, I will look through the cited sources and dig out the ones that specifically say 20. I was leaning towards "non-viable" but other editors took issue with that word. The definitions that reference 20 all would fall under non-viable, but the definitions that reference viability do not necessarily work if we say 20 (if that makes sense).--Andrew c 02:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just saying whether 20 should be written numerically "20" or spelled out "twenty". Usually for small quantaties the latter is preferable stylistically. I acknowledge the split, I rearranged, but the reason I did it the other way was because GTB noticed "its" refers to the last thing mentioned; which would be "uterus" now. - RoyBoy 800 02:24, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, and I hate to be a pain in the neck, but the more I read it now, the more it sounds that way to me.  The most elegant solution I can think of is to repeat "embryo or fetus", which isn't elegant.  As far as "twenty" versus "20", I can't see that it matters at all, and if someone changes it later, that's cool too. -GTBacchus(talk) 04:54, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Likewise, implemented lest of two evils in version below. - RoyBoy 800 05:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Version 4.1 

message: An abortion is the expulsion or removal of an embryo or fetus from a uterus, caused by or resulting in the death of the embryo or fetus. This can occur naturally with a spontaneous abortion (miscarriage), or be artificially induced through chemical, surgical, or other means which have been used historically. The ethics of induced abortion is the subject of intense debate in many parts of the world.
The word "abortion" is commonly used to mean any induced procedure that aims to terminate a pregnancy of any gestational age. Medically speaking, abortion is defined as any premature termination of a pregnancy before twenty weeks of gestation.
:Looked at SlimVirgin's version and added "natural", "artificial", "ethics" to the definition. Removed "mainstream" that's debatable and infrequent mainstream subject. If we were to include a synopsis of the debate maybe it would look like this? Although I understand we don't want the lead to be overtaken by the debate, it seems approriate to its weight and notability. It also clarifies this is about women; as I've consciously have removed women from the 1st paragraph. - RoyBoy 800 05:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Version 4.3

message: An abortion is the expulsion or removal from the uterus of an embryo or fetus, caused by or resulting in its death. This can occur naturally (miscarriage), or be artificially induced through chemical, surgical, or other means (see History of abortion). In general, abortion refers to induced abortion at any gestational age. Medically speaking, the word refers to induced abortion up to gestational week twenty.
The ethics of induced abortion is the subject of intense debate in many parts of the world. Those who oppose allowing women to seek abortions usually consider the embryo or fetus to be a fully human person from the moment of conception, and therefore regard induced abortion as morally equivalent to murder. Proponents of allowing induced abortion prioritize what they see as the right of women to control their own reproduction, and consequently regard access to safe, legal abortion as a basic human right.
:(Please note that I do not endorse this version; I'm only posting this as a (hopefully) faithful rendition of the meaning of 4.3d in (hopefully) more precise/encyclopedic terms. Please improve if/where you think I failed.) AvB ÷ talk 22:33, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I originally had uterus that way, and I do consider it to be the least awkward way to express it; the problem is it implies "the uterus" belongs to the embryo of fetus, so that forces it further down the sentence. "gestational week twenty" is strange, as I rarely see the word "gestational" and all the medical texts I've read specify the timeframe then follow it up with "gestation". And if I understood Andrew c correctly, the medical definition of "abortion" encompasses spontaneous abortion too; not just induced abortion. - RoyBoy 800 03:26, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, good points as usual. Regarding the uterus, I too considered both versions and personally find your original version more encyclopedic in that it does not mention embryo/fetus twice. Leaving it in for now, feel free to change. Gestational week twenty - agree, changing it back. One question - we now have "before week twenty" - shouldn't that be up to/including (i.e. before week 21)? Re medical def: right again, but version 4.3d has other (worse I think) problems in the sentences The word "abortion" is commonly used (...) twenty weeks of gestation in that a "perfect" copyedit would require the repetition of the full defs in these sentences, including the word death in the final sentence. The former is awkward, the latter awkward and loaded so to be avoided. My solution was mainly the better of two evils in the simple context of a copyedit - i.e. without adding, changing or removing the meaning/intent of 4.3d. Having said that, the change you're suggesting is quite simple so I've made it in version 4.3f ("all abortions" instead of "abortion"). AvB ÷ talk 13:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Version 4.3e (4.3d after copyedit of paragraph one)

message: An abortion is the expulsion or removal from the uterus of an embryo or fetus, caused by or resulting in its death. This can occur spontaneously as a miscarriage, or be artificially induced through chemical, surgical, or other means (see History of abortion). Generally "abortion" refers to induced abortion at any gestational age; however, medically speaking abortion is defined as any termination before twenty weeks of gestation.
The ethics of induced abortion is the subject of intense debate in many parts of the world. Those who oppose allowing women to seek abortions usually consider the embryo or fetus to be a fully human person from the moment of conception, and therefore regard induced abortion as morally equivalent to murder. Proponents of allowing induced abortion prioritize what they see as the right of women to control their own reproduction, and consequently regard access to safe, legal abortion as a basic human right.
:Should:
::right of women to control their own reproduction
:be changed to:
::right of an individual to control their own body
:Isn't that closer to the core issue? Or does that get too messy as one can contend the embryo is an individual? - RoyBoy 800 19:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did all the parens come from? And when did we get from 4.1, with no abortion debate in the intro, to putting abortion debate in the intro? Unhappy puppy here. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there is consensus to remove it; then everything past "world." is removed and the debate sentence is merged with the 1st paragraph, and its done. But such a significant step should be agreed upon. - RoyBoy 800 20:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. The current consensus version does not have the debate in the intro; the burden rests upon those wishing to add that verbiage to achieve consensus for the change. One puppy's opinion. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:25, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose so. - RoyBoy 800 20:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fully agree with KillerChihuahua. Also, the part after "world." has many problems (I've listed a couple of them, and a possible solution,  here) so I won't support it anywhere in the article, least of all in the intro. I would support something like it if the problems had been solved. Nevertheless, I think it would be best to wrap up paragraph 1 and try to get it past previous poll participants before taking on paragraph 2. I also share KillerChihuahua's preference for 4.1 (with minor tweaks). AvB ÷ talk 00:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's coo, but please don't drag me back to 4.1; I'm getting this sucker into summary shape... I don't want to go back. - RoyBoy 800 02:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Replying to Str1977, the 20-week definition is just that - a definition - so it isn't a question of its accuracy so much as a question of how accepted that definition is.  According to the same medical sources we've been throwing around for weeks, yes, that's the accepted definition among many medical professionals. -GTBacchus(talk) 20:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Str1977: Please take a look at our cited sources (somewhere in archive 18) and the footnote in my proposal here. Just because you do not feel that a definition meets your personal standard of what is "accurate" is not a valid excuse to ignore our sources. To be NPOV, we need to simply report our sources, not judge our sources. Medically speaking, a miscarriage is a type of 'abortion', but no one, in common parlance, uses abortion in the manner. Similarly, 'abortion' is technically defined as a termination of pregnancy before the fetus is viable. Keep in mind that there is a difference between what we commonly call the "induced abortion procedure in humans" and what medical dictionaries generally define as "abortion". Two different meanings, two different contexts, two different POVs (hence my two definition proposal weeks ago). Additionally, "late-term abortion" is not a medical term. Search through the literature at pubmed, and you will be pressed to find 'abortion' in reference to third trimester procedures, (though it is there occassionally because of the common use of the word). Finally, the number of abortions that occur at a gestational age when the fetus is viable is around .08% (around 1,000 a year). We need to avoid giving this topic undue weight in the opening paragraph. Hope this helps to clear things up.--Andrew c 20:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

text: naturally > spontaneously, as not all miscarriages are "natural". - RoyBoy 800 02:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Version 4.4

message: The lead is wrong. Missed abortion is a type of abortion, in which the embryo/fetus is not removed from the body, the lead is basically incorrect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ackoz (talk • contribs) 20:26, 11 May 2006  (UTC)
:Ackoz is correct. Suggest:
:An abortion is the removal or expulsion from the uterus of an embryo or fetus, resulting in or caused by its death. This can occur spontaneously as a miscarriage, or be artificially induced through chemical, surgical or other means. Commonly, "abortion" refers to an induced abortion procedure at any point in the pregnancy; medically, it is defined as a miscarriage or induced termination before twenty weeks gestation, which is considered nonviable. The exception is a "missed abortion" in which the embryo or fetus dies but is not expelled. Missed abortions are usually followed by spontaneous abortions. 
:REF: http://www.emedicine.com/med/topic3309.htm
:Alternate suggestion: Omit missed abortions from intro; mention in Spontaneous section. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:33, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand how he's correct. Miscarriage is integrated into the first sentence, hence the words "expulsion" and "caused by". Those are there precisely to cover missed abortion. - RoyBoy 800 03:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm liking the alternate proposal. --InShaneee 20:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it fits - the term itself is in decline, and our own Missed abortion is a redirect to Miscarriage, because almost always a missed abortion is followed by a spontaneous - but not always, in which case a surgical abortion is called for. And I can dig up a source for that but currently (here on talk) I am speaking from personal knowledge - my grandmother had a late in life pregnancy which resulted in a missed abortion, and they had to do the surgical version on her. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think cause by its death still covers missed abortion. Granted it occurs in two stages and involves natural and artificial elements... but it was initially "caused" by the death of the fetus, then required further intervention to "remove" it. I'm unsure we need to spell that out, just as mentioning late-term abortions in the lead isn't a "must have"; one can infer it from the Commonly definition. Likewise, although missed isn't mentioned, the first sentence is structured with or's so that "removal of the fetus caused by its death" is one way to read it. I don't see the fire. - RoyBoy 800 03:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

text: And just to clarify further, a missed abortion occurs spontaneously; so again its covered. - RoyBoy 800 04:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, we could also write something along the lines of "aimed at" or "intending" - which then makes clear why a "missed abortion" is "missed" or a "failed abortion" is "failed". Just a thought. Str1977 (smile back) 20:50, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be applicable in the case of a failed abortion but not a missed one. In a missed one, the pregnant woman has every intention of carrying the pregnancy to term and delivery (or at least has done nothing otherwise) but the embryo or fetus dies within her. It is a traumatic experience, and not something anyone tries to do. KillerChihuahua?!? 20:59, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry. My mistake. I was misinterpreting the above. Completely agree with you. Anyway, having now read your second post I think the current wording can stand despite this "exception". Str1977 (smile back) 21:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The lead is wrong 

message: You could've searched it yourself. Let's use the official WHO (World Health Organisation should be a trusted source, oder?) definition of abortion: 
Abortion is termination of pregnancy (expulsion or extraction of embryo/fetus) before 22 weeks of gestation or below 500 g weight of fetus.
http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/MSM_94_11/MSM_94_11_annexe3.en.html
You could have waited with the revert. That was kinda slap in my face. Now please be so good and add the reference to the article. I don't know how to do that :-) ackoz  21:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, nothing you've said here adequately addresses the reasons we had the intro the way we did.  Namely, you're choosing, like medical sources choose, to frame the defintion of abortion in a way that assumes the pro-choice side of the debate.  To define abortion as WHO does is to grant that the pro-life side is just wrong, and that abortion is not a life and death issue, fundamentally.  I'm not a huge fan of the other version, which essentially grants the pro-life side the opportunity to frame the debate, but I was hoping to do some work on the to-do list before resurrecting that particular dead horse.  Nevertheless, here we are.  The definition you're suggesting is POV, and you're ignoring, not even deeming worth reply, the months of reasons backing up the version you don't like. -GTBacchus(talk) 22:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I find 500 grams interesting, and a suitable supplement to the medical definition. What does Andrew c have to say? - RoyBoy 800 03:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You rang? 500g vs. 20 weeks vs. viablity. They all relate. It is extremely rare for a fetus to survive outside of the womb before 20 weeks gestation. It is rare for a fetus under 500g to survive. Because not all pregnancies are the same, there is not one single thing that you can point to and say "ah ha, if we took the fetus out now, it would survive". This is why I prefer the more vague term "viable", even if it isn't as precise as a numerical criteria, or combination there of. Anyway, I think fetal deaths under 500g are not considered neonatal by some definitions. It's all about relatively arbitrary categories for statistical purposes. --Andrew c 04:20, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well said, but is 500 grams part of enough medical definition(s), and if so do you consider it notable enough for inclusion in the abortion lead? Or is it a minor issue, only brought up by WHO and a few others? - RoyBoy 800 04:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to be part of a substantial proportion of the medical definitions we've seen here.  The thing with medical definitions is, as Ackoz has reminded us, they're more "diagnostic criteria" than definitions.  Medicine allows for some grey area and doesn't worry too much about it.  In general, if it's before viability, usually taken to be around 20 weeks or 500 grams, then it counts.  If it's borderline, then you make a judgement and call it something.  Doctors are comfortable with that kind of "definition" because they're neither philosophers nor mathematicians. -GTBacchus(talk) 06:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  InShaneee 

message: It was recently pointed out on another talk page that the current paragraph includes killing of pre-implanted embryos (which things like hormonal contraceptives and IUDs are suspected to sometimes do) in the abortion definition.  Was this intentional? Lyrl 22:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent point. I guess it depends on what definition of "embryo" you are using, but there has to be a way to clear that up. I always felt that "termination of a pregnancy" is a very very common phrase used in the cited definitions. However, some users objected because a) in the case of selective abortions (a minority for sure), the pregnancy isn't ended, just one (or more) of the multiple implants are removed and b) some users felt "termination" was a euphamism, although I was never convinced of this argument. Termination is used in the medical literature, in dictionary definitions, etc. Also, there are uses of the word "terminate" that connote negative things (terminator, exterminate, etc), so I don't see how it is used to 'soften' the reality of abortion. Maybe the next version could slip in "termination of a pregnancy" somewhere?--Andrew c 00:14, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe it was at some point. - RoyBoy 800 02:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of pregnancy?