Abstract

PIP: The three articles by Dr. Gans Epner, Drs. Sprang and Neerhof, and Dr. Grimes centered around the issue that criminal laws against so-called partial-birth abortion go beyond banning any one abortion procedure or just "late-term" procedures. It is noted that even the authors gave different definitions of "late term". In addition, neither the phrase "late term" nor "intact dilation" and evacuation is present or defined in any of the partial-birth abortion laws passed in 27 states or in the federal bill. Evidence shows that 17 courts across the US have blocked partial-birth abortion laws as unconstitutional, finding such laws could, at any point in a pregnancy, outlaw an abortion performed using the most common and safest procedures. In these terms, the endorsement of the federal partial-birth abortion law by the American Medical Association gave credibility to the deception that partial-birth abortion legislation is a ban on the intact dilation and extraction procedure. Moreover, it has endorsed government intrusion in a private medical decision and sanctioned a law that subjects physicians to criminal prosecution for providing necessary health care.