SE7- The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2016 (canceled)

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2016:

1. This act shall make all partial birth abortion illegal, doctors who will conduct the act of partial birth abortion shall be charged with manslaughter and lose their medical license* exception: unless the mother's life is in danger.
2. This act will heavily encourage giving babies up for adoption, not abortion.

I'm open to adding rape and incest up but let's start a debate.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I think it's a good thing for the South.

[NeverAgain]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this bill, due to it's ignorance of harm to the mother and her family. The intact dilation and extraction procedure is always used (for live fetuses) in extraordinary threats to the mother or grave fetal disorders. I see no purpose for this bill other than to perpetrate an anti-life campaign, by not taking into account the toll on families that this bill implements.

 I can give an example. My mother had a friend who planned on taking the child to term and went through all the necessary procedures to do so (ultrasounds, consistent check-ups, etc.). In one of the ultrasounds they found the child once born, would be living in a semi-vegetative state for his life, which would cost the family thousands in medical bills, without even knowing if the child would live past 13. The family made the tough decision to use the ID+E procedure, which even though hard, I support. I still support it, and rights for women and their bodies.

This bill hits home for me and I advocate the Assembly to vote against it.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this bill, due to it's ignorance of harm to the mother and her family. The intact dilation and extraction procedure is always used (for live fetuses) in extraordinary threats to the mother or grave fetal disorders. I see no purpose for this bill other than to perpetrate an anti-life campaign, by not taking into account the toll on families that this bill implements.

 I can give an example. My mother had a friend who planned on taking the child to term and went through all the necessary procedures to do so (ultrasounds, consistent check-ups, etc.). In one of the ultrasounds they found the child once born, would be living in a semi-vegetative state for his life, which would cost the family thousands in medical bills, without even knowing if the child would live past 13. The family made the tough decision to use the ID+E procedure, which even though hard, I support. I still support it, and rights for women and their bodies.

This bill hits home for me and I advocate the Assembly to vote against it.

That's sad.. I feel sorry for that family. I also have a story, the story of 60,000,000 babies being torn apart. I used to go to a Christian school, the doctor said that one of our members's baby would be unable to walk and not live. They refused to get an abortion, and guess what. That baby lived, he was born with an open spine and it's healed, his brain has healed, hell he may even be able to walk now.

[NeverAgain]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this bill, due to it's ignorance of harm to the mother and her family. The intact dilation and extraction procedure is always used (for live fetuses) in extraordinary threats to the mother or grave fetal disorders. I see no purpose for this bill other than to perpetrate an anti-life campaign, by not taking into account the toll on families that this bill implements.

 I can give an example. My mother had a friend who planned on taking the child to term and went through all the necessary procedures to do so (ultrasounds, consistent check-ups, etc.). In one of the ultrasounds they found the child once born, would be living in a semi-vegetative state for his life, which would cost the family thousands in medical bills, without even knowing if the child would live past 13. The family made the tough decision to use the ID+E procedure, which even though hard, I support. I still support it, and rights for women and their bodies.

This bill hits home for me and I advocate the Assembly to vote against it.

That's sad.. I feel sorry for that family. I also have a story, the story of 60,000,000 babies being torn apart. I used to go to a Christian school, the doctor said that one of our members's baby would be unable to walk and not live. They refused to get an abortion, and guess what. That baby lived, he was born with an open spine and it's healed, his brain has healed, hell he may even be able to walk now.

Isn't it great that those parent(s) had a choice? I am very glad that this rare case of an open spine healing worked out for them - nice to know our medical technology is working. I support their (hopefully) informed decision on the matter as I would have supported if they had chosen to terminate the pregnancy given the medical circumstances. Medical information, informed decision making, and reasonable choices are what I advocate for. This is always a hard decision, but I want to continue keeping it a decision for families and their medical providers, not policy-makers.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this bill, due to it's ignorance of harm to the mother and her family. The intact dilation and extraction procedure is always used (for live fetuses) in extraordinary threats to the mother or grave fetal disorders. I see no purpose for this bill other than to perpetrate an anti-life campaign, by not taking into account the toll on families that this bill implements.

 I can give an example. My mother had a friend who planned on taking the child to term and went through all the necessary procedures to do so (ultrasounds, consistent check-ups, etc.). In one of the ultrasounds they found the child once born, would be living in a semi-vegetative state for his life, which would cost the family thousands in medical bills, without even knowing if the child would live past 13. The family made the tough decision to use the ID+E procedure, which even though hard, I support. I still support it, and rights for women and their bodies.

This bill hits home for me and I advocate the Assembly to vote against it.

That's sad.. I feel sorry for that family. I also have a story, the story of 60,000,000 babies being torn apart. I used to go to a Christian school, the doctor said that one of our members's baby would be unable to walk and not live. They refused to get an abortion, and guess what. That baby lived, he was born with an open spine and it's healed, his brain has healed, hell he may even be able to walk now.

Isn't it great that those parent(s) had a choice? I am very glad that this rare case of an open spine healing worked out for them - nice to know our medical technology is working. I support their (hopefully) informed decision on the matter as I would have supported if they had chosen to terminate the pregnancy given the medical circumstances. Medical information, informed decision making, and reasonable choices are what I advocate for. This is always a hard decision, but I want to continue keeping it a decision for families and their medical providers, not policy-makers.

It is, however a sad one, the killing of a child. This act bans partial birth abortion, not all abortions what-so-ever. If a family doesn't want the baby, they can put it up for adoption. Partial birth abortion is when the baby is BORN keeping the head in and killing the baby, a horrific practice.

[NeverAgain]

I wholeheartedly disagree with this bill, due to it's ignorance of harm to the mother and her family. The intact dilation and extraction procedure is always used (for live fetuses) in extraordinary threats to the mother or grave fetal disorders. I see no purpose for this bill other than to perpetrate an anti-life campaign, by not taking into account the toll on families that this bill implements.

 I can give an example. My mother had a friend who planned on taking the child to term and went through all the necessary procedures to do so (ultrasounds, consistent check-ups, etc.). In one of the ultrasounds they found the child once born, would be living in a semi-vegetative state for his life, which would cost the family thousands in medical bills, without even knowing if the child would live past 13. The family made the tough decision to use the ID+E procedure, which even though hard, I support. I still support it, and rights for women and their bodies.

This bill hits home for me and I advocate the Assembly to vote against it.

That's sad.. I feel sorry for that family. I also have a story, the story of 60,000,000 babies being torn apart. I used to go to a Christian school, the doctor said that one of our members's baby would be unable to walk and not live. They refused to get an abortion, and guess what. That baby lived, he was born with an open spine and it's healed, his brain has healed, hell he may even be able to walk now.

Isn't it great that those parent(s) had a choice? I am very glad that this rare case of an open spine healing worked out for them - nice to know our medical technology is working. I support their (hopefully) informed decision on the matter as I would have supported if they had chosen to terminate the pregnancy given the medical circumstances. Medical information, informed decision making, and reasonable choices are what I advocate for. This is always a hard decision, but I want to continue keeping it a decision for families and their medical providers, not policy-makers.

It is, however a sad one, the killing of a child. This act bans partial birth abortion, not all abortions what-so-ever. If a family doesn't want the baby, they can put it up for adoption. Partial birth abortion is when the baby is BORN keeping the head in and killing the baby, a horrific practice.

First, let's clarify our terminology. The procedure that you are referencing is known as "Intact dilation and extraction." It is used following late term fetal demise (miscarriage) as well as termination of pregnancy, typically for birth defects or the health of the mother.

Second, the baby is not born. Also current practices for this medical procedure are done only after fetal demise, either naturally or induced.

Third, your bill takes control for a medical decision away from patients and their providers and puts the government in their stead. Is that a precedent you plan on continuing for the South? Getting the government out of personal decisions was an ideal I assumed you held.

Fourth, your bill suggests an increased role for adoption, but A. does not support or augment the adoption infrastructure and B. fails to recognize the the low adoption rates of children with profound disabilities, as would likely be the case here.

[Ex-Assemblyman Steelers]

I am always against all kind of prohibition. Because prohibition leading us only in one way. Way of illegal activities and not resolving nothing.
But conservatives take cares about our kids only before their birth and after that their become states problem.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Unfortunately, I disagree with those positions. I believe that the harming of a small baby in brutal killing methods such as this is an awful thing. First off, if a mother didn't want to have a baby she should have used birth control. If it was rape or incest however, that's a different story. I believe that continuing the tradition of life is key.. If it is for the health of the mother I'm absolutely for it... Should we take this to a vote? Also, you get adopting grants as of one of my old bills^

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2016:

1. This act shall make all partial birth abortion illegal, doctors who will conduct the act of partial birth abortion shall be charged with manslaughter and lose their medical license* exception: unless the mother's life is in danger, rape, incest.
2. This act will heavily encourage giving babies up for adoption, not abortion.
3. This act shall encourage women who do not wish to have babies to use birth control.


Is that a good solution? This is for partial birth abortion, others will be allowed.... for now...

[Ex-Assemblyman Steelers]

I can agree only with point 3.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2016:

1. This act shall make all partial birth abortion illegal, doctors who will conduct the act of partial birth abortion shall be charged with manslaughter and lose their medical license* exception: unless the mother's life is in danger, rape, incest.
2. This act will heavily encourage giving babies up for adoption, not abortion.
3. This act shall encourage women who do not wish to have babies to use birth control.

Are these just general statements of opinion (i.e. 'I encourage you to do x, y, and z'), or do you intend to use this act to promote adoption/birth control? If the latter, how will you do that?

[Enduro]

If I may: perhaps creating a Planned Parenthood type agency is a good idea; you could compromise, and not let this agency perform abortions, but it could provide additional adoption services, and birth control. That way, this bill wouldn't be just stating opinions, and would do something to prevent unwanted babies and abortions.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I was originally going to say advertise it and encourage it but a planned parenthood ish organization that doesn't provide abortions is great! I'm surprised we don't have it! But yes we shall definitely encourage birth control over abortions

[NeverAgain]

Unfortunately, I disagree with those positions. I believe that the harming of a small baby in brutal killing methods such as this is an awful thing. First off, if a mother didn't want to have a baby she should have used birth control. If it was rape or incest however, that's a different story. I believe that continuing the tradition of life is key.. If it is for the health of the mother I'm absolutely for it... Should we take this to a vote? Also, you get adopting grants as of one of my old bills^

The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2016:

1. This act shall make all partial birth abortion illegal, doctors who will conduct the act of partial birth abortion shall be charged with manslaughter and lose their medical license* exception: unless the mother's life is in danger, rape, incest.
2. This act will heavily encourage giving babies up for adoption, not abortion.
3. This act shall encourage women who do not wish to have babies to use birth control.


Is that a good solution? This is for partial birth abortion, others will be allowed.... for now...

I don't think we're understanding what this procedure is or does. This is not for cases of rape or incest because it is a late-term procedure, and those cases are for earlier in the pregnancy. Birth control will not affect intact dilation and extraction procedures, as I said before this is a late-term procedure and is only used for the health of the mother or extreme birth defects (that can only be detected and occur later in the pregnancy).

You are welcome to encourage birth control for which I agree. But the fact remains that this has very little to do with the procedure as most ID+E procedures are done not because the mother doesn't want it, but because the mother will not be able to adequately support the child, due to her own health or the child's.

Would your bill also ban the ID+E procedure for fetal demise late in pregnancy (miscarriage) for which this is used most commonly?

[Pingvin]

I echo the Governor NeverAgain's concerns about the miscarriage cases.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

Hmm... I'm open to adding the miscarriage, etc onto the bill but if it is simply an "unwanted and/or special needs" child, it should be adopted.

[Classic Conservative]

I support abortion for rape and incest in the first trimester but in the late weeks of pregnancy a women shouldn't be able to have an abortion for rape and incest because they have known about it for 6 plus months more than likely. It should only be allowed the late term if the mothers life is in danger or a miscarriage. But that's my opinion and I hope the assembly changes the bill to say that.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I've decided to cancel this bill. I believe it is not in the best interests of the South at this time.

[NeverAgain]

I've decided to cancel this bill. I believe it is not in the best interests of the South at this time.

Thank you Speaker for thinking this through carefully, and not going guns-a-blazing after the awful attacks on your family.

[Former Senator Haslam2020]

I've decided to cancel this bill. I believe it is not in the best interests of the South at this time.

Thank you Speaker for thinking this through carefully, and not going guns-a-blazing after the awful attacks on your family.

Thanks