NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/talk/abortion/48717

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-19 | 7.4 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!utgpu!utorvm!ryevm.ryerson.ca!admn8647
Organization: Ryerson Polytechnical Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Thursday, 19 Nov 1992 21:43:03 EST
From: Linda Birmingham <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Menstrual Extraction and the 5-week limit (Revision)
References:  <[e-mail]>
Lines: 162

In article <[e-mail]> Peter Nyikos says:
>
>Almost from the day I joined this newsgroup, I have stated that I would
>allow unrestricted abortion up to the end of the 5th week.  Many abortion
>clinics refuse to do such early abortions because they are committed to
>the suction curettage method of abortion which they claim is not suitable
>for use at the very early stages of pregnancy.

90% of abortions are done using vacuum aspiration and this is
the accepted medical procedure for ending pregnancy from the
4 to 12th week.

Many women would be unlikely to know that they are pregnant
before the 4th week, a little light doesn't go off when
one conceives Mr. Nyikos, and even those who suspected they
were would need to get positive test results which of course
take time.  Unless of course you are suggesting women should
particpate in unnecessary medical procedures every time they
skip a period.  After that they would need time to make a
decision, arrange an appointment and find the funds.

btw, "several aspects of the techniques developed for
menstrual extraction have been incorporated into
medical practice for early abortion with flexible cannulas"
 The New Our Bodies, Ourselves, The Boston Women's Health
  Book Collective

>I have my doubts about this, for reasons I have posted on before, but
>rather than go into them now, I would like to initiate talk on a method
>that has long been in use, called "menstrual extraction" or "menstrual
>regulation."  The instruments used are inexpensive and are sold in various
>places as a means of self-induced abortion.  This use of them has come
>in for a great deal of valid criticism, but in proper hands, augmented
>with modern optical aids, the method appears to have great promise.

Long been used?  Menstrual extraction was developed in
the early 1970s by self-help groups of the Feminist Women's Health
Centre in the US.  Its primary use is to eliminate menstrual
discomfort and there has not been sufficient long term research
to determine whether there is any health risk (same source).

>I first learned about it from the bestseller (more than a million copies
>sold) _Everywoman_, by Derek Llewellyn-Jones [Faber and Faber, London, 1978]:
>
>      ...The earlier the abortion, the safer it is.  This has led some
>     doctors to suggest the method of 'menstrual regulation'.  In this
>     a woman who is at risk of being pregnant, waits to see if her
>     menstrual period comes on time and, if it does not, seeks help
>     within 7 days.  At this time it is impossible to diagnose
>     pregnancy clinically, and laboratory tests (except for a special
>     test) are not helpful.

"1.  An aspiration procedure before five to six weeks LMP,
 when pregnancy cannot yet be verified by a pelvic exam, is
 called preemptive abortion, endometrial aspiration or
 menstrual regulation. (Some people also call it menstrual
 extraction, but that term describes a different procedure
 and should not be used for this one. See p. 295).  ...

>[This last statement is obsolete; see closing comment.]
>
>     The doctor empties the uterus with a
>     small tube attached to a syringe.  The woman may or may not be
>     pregnant so that no moral question is raised and the doctor is
>     only regulating her menstruation.

 ...A syringe is attached to the cannula to suction out the
 lining of the uterus, including the small amount of fetal
 and placental tissue if there is a pregnancy...No dilation
 (stretching of the cervical opening) is needed to insert
 a small (four to five millimeters) flexible plastic cannula
 into the uterus." (same source)

>Two sets of comments follow, pro-life and pro-choice:

>Pro-Choice Comments:
>
>        1.  In the part of the second paragraph that I omitted, one
>discovers one big problem with the British program: in about 1% of the
>cases, a pregnancy is NOT ended.
>
>        Since incomplete abortions are hazardous to health, I
>think the only way we can really make menstrual extraction the wave of
>the future is to combine the present instruments with modern optical
>instruments which will allow one to make sure the emptying is complete.

You better also test for RH blood types, since this is
not routine procedure for preemptive abortions.

Also what would you do about failed abortions Mr. Nyikos,
would the woman be allowed a second chance after your
5 week time limit?

>  Just as the Dalkon Shield and DES
>were outlawed because safer methods of obtaining the same results
> are available,

The Dalkon Shield and DES were outlawed because they
were killing and maiming women.  They were both products
put on the market by companies that knew they posed
health risks.  What did you think all those lawsuits
were about.

>so I would love
>to see most abortions after the 5th week outlawed at least

Yes everyone knows that you love to outlaw abortions Mr. Nyikos.

>in part because a safer alternative is available for all women whose
>primary method of contraception has failed.

Your safer method is already in use.  The reality is
the majority of woman would not be able to utilize
them during your window of opportunity.

>I would like to see conscientious gynecologists, preferably with no
>prior abortion experience, commit themselves to making the
>menstrual extraction method completely effective as well as safe,
>legal, and early; I wouldn't mind adding "rare" to the list once
>the present methods have fallen into disrepute.

Then I suggest you send donations to the Woman's Health
Centre in your area.

>BTW that "special test" the author was talking about is now in
>common use, and known as the blood test.  Also there are urine tests,

"A simple urine slide test can accurately detect
pregnancy 42 days after your last normal period started:
in other words, when your period is about two weeks late
if you normally menstruate once a month....Incorrect
results, however, are possible if your urine contains
protein or other contaminants...The lab is likely to
process only one batch daily, so results may not be
available for 24 hours or more."

>available over the counter, which are almost as reliable, and just as
>early.

"Some can be used as early as the day your period would be due,
others are not accurate until your period is nine days
overdue.  *Following directions carefully, however, is
absolutely essential for accurate results* In one study,
researchers found that 20% of the women using home kits had
falsely negative results.  In other words, the test results
was negative even though they actually were pregnant.  An
even larger percentage of women, 35%, had falsely negative
results with tests performed before their menstrual period
was at least nine days late....If your test is negative
you should plan to have another test about a week later if
your period still has not started"
  Understanding your Body:  Every Woman's Guide to
  Gynecology and Health, F. Stewart, M.D., F. Guest,
  G. Stewart, M.D. & R. Hatcher, M.D.



Linda
--
They're complicated people leading complicated lives, and
he complicates their problems by telling complicated lies
     The Flag, Barenaked Ladies