This study (title paraphrased to fit out thread title rules) talks of the roles in birth spacing in particular on reduction of maternal mortality world wide http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521693416300682 The USA seems to be an outlier in world wide trends to legalise abortion http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.301197 There is some concern that the restriction of abortion availability in Texas has seen a rise in Maternal Mortality there. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/20/texas-maternal-mortality-rate-health-clinics-funding
THANKS! Great post! From you link :"" The finding comes from a report, appearing in the September issue of the journal Obstetrics and Gynecology, that the maternal mortality rate in the United States increased between 2000 and 2014, even while the rest of the world succeeded in reducing its rate. Excluding California, where maternal mortality declined, and Texas, where it surged, the estimated number of maternal deaths per 100,000 births rose to 23.8 in 2014 from 18.8 in 2000 – or about 27%. But the report singled out Texas for special concern, saying the doubling of mortality rates in a two-year period was hard to explain “in the absence of war, natural disaster, or severe economic upheaval”. From 2000 to the end of 2010, Texas’s estimated maternal mortality rate hovered between 17.7 and 18.6 per 100,000 births. But after 2010, that rate had leaped to 33 deaths per 100,000, and in 2014 it was 35.8. Between 2010 and 2014, more than 600 women died for reasons related to their pregnancies. No other state saw a comparable increase. In the wake of the report, reproductive health advocates are blaming the increase on Republican-led budget cuts that decimated the ranks of Texas’s reproductive healthcare clinics. In 2011, just as the spike began, the Texas state legislature cut $73.6m from the state’s family planning budget of $111.5m. The two-thirds cut forced more than 80 family planning clinics to shut down across the state. The remaining clinics managed to provide services – such as low-cost or free birth control, cancer screenings and well-woman exams – to only half as many women as before. At the same time, Texas eliminated all Planned Parenthood clinics – whether or not they provided abortion services – from the state program that provides poor women with preventive healthcare. Previously, Planned Parenthood clinics in Texas offered cancer screenings and contraception to more than 130,000 women. In 2013, Texas restored funding for the family planning budget to original levels. But the healthcare providers who survived the initial cuts reported struggles to restore services to their original levels."""""""" Is that their idea of PRO-"LIFE" ?!! The article states "in the absence of war"....but war is NOT absent, it is alive and well in Texas as men declare it and wage it on women! What nasty despicable people live there!!! Again: Is that their idea of PRO-"LIFE" ?!!
It all depends on the State in the USA. Some states make it harder to have an abortion than do others. Until this type of legislation works it way through the judicial process it diminishes females' choice. My personal view is that females of all ages should always have the right to end any pregnancy. How the hospital or clinic does it depends if the fetus can be saved or not. If it can be saved then it should be incubated and nursed to full term. But that's just one old man's opinion. In democracies it is legislators that make the laws, not one old man or one old woman.
Most abortions are performed BEFORE viability. There is no fetus to save. If they could be "saved" WHO would you want to pay for saving these fetuses??? It's VERRRRY expensive. Except the lawmakers in Texas have a war against women going on and they should be stopped....
And if it is near term that is what happens. Remeber that the overwhelming majority of late term pregnancy terminations (post viability) are wanted pregnancies gone horribly terribly tragically wring
Abortions between 16 and 23 weeks are legal...they are not "semi late".....how many times will that have to be repeated for you to get it?
Should they be legal? When most of these women are irresponsible and the fetus is kicking around in there? Irresponsible women don't abort at week 24+ because week 16+ is the typical age range when they do their deed, that's another generalized way to say it. But yeah, getting back to Bowerbird, it's true very few abortions are done after 24 weeks for bad reasons. (That doesn't mean the occasional questionable termination doesn't happen however)
Before anybody picks apart my post, I said irresponsible women. Particularly focusing on the irresponsible ones. Obviously most women who have abortions don't have them after 16 weeks.
And even those that have them at 16 weeks a large number will be abnormalities the rest is because they were denied earlier access to abortion https://www.guttmacher.org/evidence-you-can-use/later-abortion
No eight weeks is the more typical period for abortion Now what has your anti abortion rant got to do with maternal mortality?
Abortions between 16 and 23 weeks are legal...they are not "semi late".....how many times will that have to be repeated for you to get it? FoxHastings, Yesterday at 10:07 PM Oh for crap's sake...YES, they should be . The fetus is not viable..I SEE YOU STILL HAVEN'T LOOKED UP THAT WORD YET....This issue has been settled . A. "Irresponsible" is not a crime. B. YOU do not determine what is or isn't "irresponsible"....and if you think you do then provide proof you do, you know PROOF, something you've never used here! Sounds RESPONSIBLE TO ME! Aborting before viability...why doesn't it to you?????? , Like so many of your comments this elicits another giant , ""SO WHAT ? ""
""Irresponsible is not a crime. YOU do not determine what is or isn't "responsible". Do you think if a woman is considered by you to be irresponsible she should pay for it with her life? That seems to be what you are saying.....
