Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Reproductive Justice and Gender

How a Late-Term Abortion Saved My Life

By Cecily Kellogg, RH Reality Check. Posted July 6, 2009.


Will you or your daughter be so lucky?
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

On Sunday May 30th, a man walked into a church in Wichita, Kansas and shot to death Dr. George Tiller. Dr. Tiller was volunteering as an usher that Sunday, so he was standing in the lobby of the church when the gunman entered. Unfortunately, Dr. Tiller's death didn't really come as a surprise; his medical practice centered on performing abortions, particularly late term abortions, and he'd been attacked before. Regardless of the near constant threats and harassment he received, Dr. Tiller was committed to his work. Why? Because he believed that "abortion is a matter of survival for women."

It was for me. In October of 2004, I was pregnant with my sons Nicholas and Zachary. With great joy and expectation, my husband, my best friend, and I visited my doctor for a normal growth ultrasound. I was nearly 23 weeks pregnant, hovering at the start of the third trimester. Within moments it was clear something was wrong; one of the boys was still and had no heartbeat. When I met with my doctor, routine screening revealed the worst: the symptoms I'd been experiencing that I thought were normal with a twin pregnancy were actually evidence that I was sick -- very, very sick. I was immediately admitted to the hospital with severe preeclampsia, and though my doctors tried mightily to slow the progression of the disease, by the morning of October 27, 2004 a group of doctors stood at my bedside and delivered the worst news I'd ever received.

I was in advanced kidney failure. My blood pressure was skyrocketing, and it could not be controlled with medications. My liver was beginning to decline. The horrific headache I was experiencing could no longer be treated with pain medications because they were afraid it would depress my ability to breathe when I began to have the seizures they expected at any moment. I would soon likely suffer a stroke or a heart attack. In other words, I was going to die unless the pregnancy was terminated. Immediately.

There was no hope for my surviving son. He was too tiny and too frail to be viable. With my dangerously high blood pressure, a c-section would have likely caused me to bleed to death, and inducing labor would have stressed my system too much. My safest option was the procedure known as an intact dilation and extraction. It would save my life, and preserve my future fertility. As luck would have it, my obstetrician happened to be one of three doctors in the Philadelphia area that was both trained and willing to do the procedure. Within an hour of receiving my bad news, I lay in the surgical suite, covered in tubes and wires, weeping inconsolably as the doctors tried to offer comfort as they prepped me for surgery.

It was the worst day of my life.

After I came home from the hospital, grieving, I searched and found other women like me -- women whose lives were saved by the late-term medical termination of a pregnancy. I also met women who chose to spare their children from agonizing health conditions and birth defects by having an abortion. What I learned is that we are rare; only 1.1 percent of all abortions are performed after the 21st week of pregnancy (according to the Guttmacher Institute), and doctors only perform them in cases of extreme medical need. Dr. Tiller himself never performed a late term abortion without counseling the parents -- and getting a second opinion from another doctor. My doctor described the day of my surgery as the worst in his professional career.

With the help of other women like me, I grieved. I healed. I tried again, and in June of 2006, my wild and fierce daughter Victoria was born. As I healed, I came to realize how lucky I was. Yes, I said lucky. This was in 2004, before the Partial Birth Abortion Ban became law, and my doctors were able to move quickly to save my life without worrying about breaking the law. My doctor knew the procedure and was willing to perform it; something that has already become rare and will be rarer still if doctors have to put their lives on the line to perform this life saving medical procedure. If it's you or your daughter, will you be so lucky?


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: pregnancy, reproductive rights, late-term abortion, george tiller

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
A Distraction from the Real Issue
Posted by: fredddd on Jul 6, 2009 3:41 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This anecdote has been making the rounds on different publications lately - however it has nothing to do with any controversy over late term abortion, since it involves abortion where the mother's life is at risk. Almost all of the American public is against late term abortion, but agrees that it should be legal if the mothers life is at risk. This also has virtually nothing to do with Dr. Tiller. A review of his records reveals that in a typical year,of the 195 late term abortions done, there was not even one abortion done where the mother's life as at risk. Almost all were done for "psychological" reasons. This kind of anecdote is a distraction from the real issue, and also can be used as a smoke screen for the real issue, for those who are not discerning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» so what IS the "real issue"? Posted by: goatini
» thank you for the TRUTH Posted by: goatini
» RE: A Distraction from the Real Issue Posted by: bloominblacksheep
» RE: A Distraction from the Real Issue Posted by: bloominblacksheep
» you are an evil sicko Posted by: goatini
» fredddd, you're wrong Posted by: dudelette
» RE: fredddd, you're wrong Posted by: maglindracia
Psychological reasons are valid
Posted by: nise52 on Jul 7, 2009 8:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You just can't go in for a late-term abortion and say you want it done for psychological reason and have it done on the spot. Before Roe/Wade my mother (age 43 with 3 existing children) went to her doctor and demanded an abortion. Her doctor asked "why". Mom said she was done raising babies and it would "kill" her to start over at her age). He sent her to a psychologist who discussed it with her and agreed that she couldn't face the birth. Then she was sent to a second doctor who essentially said the same thing. By this time she was 4 months pregnant. Dad was against the abortion. He dropped her off at the hospital door and drove off. She had to take a cab home when it was done. She was emotionally unable to carry this child. Unknown to us (and modern medicine at the time) she was suffering from severe clinical depression. If Zoloft had been available back then her whole attitude might have been different and she might have gone on with the pregnancy. As it was, the doctors felt that if she had been forced to go through with the birth there was an excellent chance that she would have done harm to either the child or herself (or both). And there were 3 children already alive and at home.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Govt Doesn't Consider It A Baby....
Posted by: nise52 on Jul 7, 2009 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Fundamentalist Christians believe that life begins at the moment a human cell is fertilized. Why? Because their Christian bible tells them so (even though abortion is only addressed in regards to "damage to property"). That's right...the bible considers women to be property of their owners (fathers, husbands, brothers etc).

Our government doesn't consider the fetus to be a citizen (issued a Social Security number and eligible as a parental tax deduction) until it has been born.

Until the government issues SS#'s and tax deductions every time a woman has sex (in case of potential fertilized eggs that might incur) they have NO RIGHT to be involved in such medical decisions. Even doctors and hospitals must maintain patient privacy when it comes to medical procedures.

When the partial birth abortion ban was signed into law by George W. Bush, the photo was printed in the media. ONLY MEN were in the picture.

linked text

Where are the women...the ones who might need this procedure one day to save their lives?

Being controlled...again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thanks for sharing
Posted by: Jeannetics on Jul 7, 2009 9:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thank you for sharing such a personal story. I am not yet that brave. I know many women have their own stories. I too fear that my daughter will not have the choices and options I have been lucky enough to have. Many women fought for me and other women to have these choices, to be allowed to make such a personal decision with her doctor and if she chooses her loved ones. I am grateful to these women and I will continue to fight so my daughter will have the choices we all have and maybe more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thankyou
Posted by: Seranvali on Jul 8, 2009 5:01 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for being prepared to talk about this. It points up, yet again, how much we stand to lose if our 'moral guardians' get their way.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The whole story is never told
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jul 8, 2009 6:00 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From the article:
"What I learned is that we are rare; only 1.1 percent of all abortions are performed after the 21st week of pregnancy (according to the Guttmacher Institute), and doctors only perform them in cases of extreme medical need."
. . . . .

This is true, no matter the misinformation submitted by a poster elsewhere in this comment section. There in that inaccurate post it was also stated that Dr. Tiller performed late term abortions where the mother was not in danger of dying. A couple of thoughts.

Whomever – supposedly – got access to those sealed records broke the law;

The life of the mother is not the only reason to perform late-term abortions. Another is in cases of anencephalic babies, that is, babies with no brain, with water where their cerebral cortex is supposed to be. These babies have no chance of surviving more than a few hours outside of the womb, and in those few hours they die a slow, torturous, excruciating death. These tragedies, along with horribly and hopelessly deformed fetusses, again having little to no chance of survival, constitute the vast majority, if not all, of late-term abortions where the mother's life is not directly threatened. (My brother-in-law, who has been in the medical profession for decades and has seen these tragedies first hand, confirmed this, so he should know just a little more than lunatic fundamentalists and stupid-but-loudmouthed pundits.)

Of course, this information is conspicuously missing from the argument, especially from the the "keep-'em-barefoot-and-pregnant" right-wing loony-tune crowd. Rationality has never been their long suit. It is particularly galling, however, that the "news" media continually shirks their responsibility not only for fairness but for accuracy and truth as well by omitting this very important information. This life-or-death issue that has been so misrepresented and politicized is too important to play propaganda games with!

I wonder how many of them, the right-wingers or their oh-so-compliant media friends, would change their tune if it was their wife or daughter in this predicament? Would they let them die just for the sake of a point of view? I hope not.

(Note: My wife had an ectopic pregnancy, and had we been under the "El Salvadore" model that the Palin lovers so favor, my wife would be dead now, and I would have never known the two beautiful children we had after that emergency. Shame on fundamentalist zealots for being so stupid, so backward, and so damned mean and uncaring. And double shame on the media for failing in their primary responsibility to be accurate and report ALL the facts.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The whole story is never told Posted by: goodyweaver
Kansas reports abortion statistics
Posted by: mareeetee on Jul 8, 2009 7:29 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
State law requires that physicians, hospitals, and ambulatory surgical centers report abortions
to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE).These records are available to the public. In 2008 there were 192 late term abortions done, none of which was to save the mothers life. Most of these were done for "psychological" reasons.
Tiller made over a million dollars a year in his clinic. There were at least nine ambulance runs from Tiller's clinic in recent years, with Tiller's victims taken to the local hospital because they were seriously injured at his clinic. Those runs took place on the following dates: October 12, 2002, January 23, 2004, June 4, 2004, September 2, 2004,January 13, 2005 February 17, 2005 and May 11, 2005. As recently as March 12, 2009 a young girl was transported from George Tiller's clinic to the local hospital emergency room, hemorrhaging so badly the clinic staff could not stop the bleeding. At least 2 women died from Tiller's botched abortions. However, if he fits the dark ideology of certain people he is called "a hero" anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» it never happened Posted by: goatini
» LIAR!!! Posted by: goatini
» RE: LIAR!!! Posted by: mareeetee
» RE: LIAR!!! Posted by: mareeetee
» you are continuing to LIE!!! Posted by: goatini
stats
Posted by: mareeetee on Jul 9, 2009 8:40 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The patient is suffering a medical emergency. Based
on examination and interview of the patient by the
attending physician, the physician judges that the
abortion is necessary to prevent substantial and
permanent damage to a major bodily function." 0 0 0
Total out of the 192 viable pregancies is 0. If there is no medical problem, that means "pyscholigical" 100 percent were done for "psychological" reasons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: stats Posted by: mareeetee
A word on "psychological reasons" for LTA...
Posted by: goodyweaver on Jul 9, 2009 9:35 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I consider myself extremely progressive. I have no doubt in my heart about the absurdity of right-wing arguments on pretty much everything. I support maintaining access to safe, legal early abortion for all women and programs to assist women who choose to keep their babies.

With that said, perhaps I am not a "good liberal" in the end, because I have massive problems with late-term abortion. For years I have tried to find out precisely what the health issues are that would require such a procedure. I agree that when the life of the mother is in danger, of course the procedure should be legal. But this anecdote is honestly the first one I've seen. At one point, I called Planned Parenthood, and even they could not explain to me when LTA was truly necessary. I wish, if the issue here is truly women's health, that there were more information available on this matter.

Aside from the life of the mother, I think that as "progressives," we're walking a scary line here, pushing the idea that viable babies can be killed in the womb up till the moment of birth for "psychological reasons." If a woman is a danger to herself or others, she should be given psychiatric treatment, not a LTA. Hormones during pregnancy can cause psychological problems - everything from depression to psychosis. I have a hard time believing that the solution is late-term abortion of otherwise healthy infants. And I question whether a woman who is so psychologically distressed is making a truly informed decision - and whether when many of these women stabilize, they are actually devastated by the loss of their child. I'm not sure we support "women's rights" by supporting the right of women with mental illness to kill children - and I think we do a disservice to the real cause of maintaining access to safe legal early-term abortion by arguing that virtually full-term, healthy human beings have no right to live. I know people who object to cats being euthanized or serial killers being put to death who argue that until a "fetus" leaves a woman's body, it's not "really human." This, to me, is a frightening view of human life. And it seems more a reflection of a culture that doesn't value life in general than anything else.

What makes me most frustrated here is that the two "sides" on this issue both make such wild claims that it becomes impossible to grasp what is actually going on. Those opposed say there is NEVER any reason for the procedure; they claim that the doctors involved are only doing it for money and present "evidence" that there have never been any real late-term abortions for medical reasons. This is, of course, absurd - it requires that we believe that every doctor who has EVER performed a late-term abortion is a lying murderer, which makes no sense. Conversely, however, those who support access to LTA claim that it is NEVER performed inappropriately - while simultaneously arguing that "psychological reasons" is adequate medical reason for dilating a woman's cervix, partially delivering a healthy infant, and then killing it. This just seems insane. And so we in the middle, who want to protect women's health, but also value the lives of healthy late-term babies, are left not knowing WHAT to believe or WHAT to support. I just wish we could all agree that yes, when a woman is in danger of death or permanent serious physical damage, or when an infant has an illness or deformity that would cause death or a short life of excruciating pain, a LTA is acceptable. But I also wish we could agree that a healthy 8 or 9-month old fetus - a baby that can hear and see and breathe on its own - does have the right to live, regardless of the mental health of the mother. And if that requires that we hospitalize a suicidal pregnant woman rather than kill her baby, so be it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement