Abstract

PIP: In Drs. Sprang and Neerhof's article regarding the partial-birth abortion law, it is noted that proposed federal legislation would ban only the intact dilatation and extraction (D&X) procedure. Such an argument is fallacious, since the wording of the proposed federal legislation about D&X is vague when compared with the ACOG definition of intact D&X. This may be because intact D&X, described for the public in a graphic and disturbing text, is being used by the anti-choice movement to achieve its desired outcome of criminalization of all abortion procedures. In these terms, the question as to why the precise ACOG definition of intact D&X is not used in the language of the legislation is asked. Moreover, it is believed that the authors of the article have disregarded the woman's health and well-being because of their obsession with the fetus's rights. Overall, it is suggested that real efforts must be made to care for women whether that entails helping them find ways out of abusive relationships, assisting them in nurturing children, or providing them with effective birth control, including abortion.