Um... For what purpose?... Who is buying aborted fetus parts?...

In health care, patients sometimes want to donate tissue to scientific research that can help lead to medical breakthroughs, such as treatments and cures for serious diseases. Women at Planned Parenthood who have abortions are no different. At several of our health centers, we help patients who want to donate tissue for scientific research, and we do this just like every other high-quality health care provider does β€” with full, appropriate consent from patients and under the highest ethical and legal standards.

This is still super fucking sketchy. I get the argument for bodily autonomy and all that, but does a mother really have a right to donate the fetus's organs? The mother isn't the patient in question -- those tissues aren't hers. You can't get consent from a fetus, and it's a bit of a stretch to say the mother is acting in a medical proxy capacity.

A comparison to the ever popular circumcision debates of Bungie comes to mind.

Unnecessary infant circumcision should be illegal. . . Period.

Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on July 14, 2015, 04:49:12 PM

Quote

In health care, patients sometimes want to donate tissue to scientific research that can help lead to medical breakthroughs, such as treatments and cures for serious diseases. Women at Planned Parenthood who have abortions are no different. At several of our health centers, we help patients who want to donate tissue for scientific research, and we do this just like every other high-quality health care provider does β€” with full, appropriate consent from patients and under the highest ethical and legal standards.

This is still super fucking sketchy. I get the argument for bodily autonomy and all that, but does a mother really have a right to donate the fetus's organs? The mother isn't the patient in question -- those tissues aren't hers. You can't get consent from a fetus, and it's a bit of a stretch to say the mother is acting in a medical proxy capacity.

I can't see it as any different than any decision made about a live child's health by the parents. A comparison to the ever popular circumcision debates of Bungie comes to mind.

Well it's different in the sense that medical proxies are bound by regulations which preclude operations like abortion which terminate the patient's life without any medical reason (i.e., artificial life support). Clearly fetuses aren't classified as patients (because they're not 'people', legally), but on the other hand those tissues don't belong to the mother like her own tissues nor like her property. She presumably can't just take the fetus home with her. It's apparently a common practice to ship aborted fetuses to research facilities, but I'm just confused about who has the authority to determine what happens to them.

I just have a lot of trepidation about abortion clinics seemingly providing an apparently justified reason to use their service for mothers on the fence (i.e., if a mother is debating whether to do it, but feels more justified in doing so because it seems like it's beneficial for science). I'm not sure if I'm articulating it well.

I just have a lot of trepidation about abortion clinics seemingly providing an apparently justified reason to use their service for mothers on the fence (i.e., if a mother is debating whether to do it, but feels more justified in doing so because it seems like it's beneficial for science). I'm not sure if I'm articulating it well.

I understand what you mean, and if I'm not mistaken, you're rather against abortion in like, 98% of cases, so I can totally see the logic.

I can't say that I agree though.

Assuming there is regulation on it (i.e. Not just taking the remains to a lab for shits and giggles), I see no problem with it.

I find it uncomfortable, but better to have the  (assumed unavoidable abortion) death have some use than it put to waste and other, possibly more controversial research carried out for the same end result.