Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 784

Should the U.S. Ban Abortions After 20 Weeks Of Pregnancy (With Exceptions)?

Argument in favor

Unborn babies can feel pain after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Abortions outside of that timeframe should be outlawed to ensure the safety and well-being of unborn life.

IAmNormaL's Opinion
···
04/11/2019
I have just recently changed my view on abortion. Because of this reason. If the baby can feel pain...why is this still happening....I would hope you wouldn't kill and cut up an alive already born child?!?!? and anything after 20 weeks can feel the stress and trauma of pain and that's just not right....
Like (85)
Follow
Share
John's Opinion
···
08/16/2019
Ok it’s just a medical procedure, but then execution is also just a medical procedure. The result is the same only the child is innocent
Like (30)
Follow
Share
SneakyPete's Opinion
···
08/16/2019
👍🏻 House Bill H.T. 784 The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act 👍🏻 I’m in strong support of and recommend the passage of the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” which would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Abortions after 20 weeks would be allowed if the mother’s life is threatened by the pregnancy or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Unborn babies can feel pain after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Abortions outside of that timeframe should be outlawed to ensure the safety and well-being of unborn life. SneakyPete...... 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻. 8.16.19.....
Like (27)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The male legislators who proposed this bill should not have a say on what women choose to do with their bodies. This bill tramples on women's reproductive rights.

burrkitty's Opinion
···
08/16/2019
If you want to ACTUALLY lower the abortion rate, then demand low cost or free or OTC long lasting birth control; demand comprehensive medically and scientifically accurate sex education; and give paid maternity leave, healthcare, child care and education! Looking at some major causes of abortion and addressing its systemic issues are a far more effective in curbing abortions than banning them. Have we not learned a history lesson from prohibition? Or the current failed war on drugs? Outlawing alcohol and drugs resulted in a rise in drug addictions. The more dangerous illicit substances, the more violent crime and higher rates of addiction. America’s drug and alcohol problems didn’t just persist, they actually proliferated. Making something illegal doesn’t make the problem go away. It just fosters a criminal, unregulated market, as the demand still remains. Conservatives refuse to ban guns because they claim it won’t stop criminals from obtaining them and using them for violence. So why would they expect a ban on abortions to magically make them disappear? This type of positional inconsistency renders their political stances a bit idiotic. The Christian far right can’t have it all -- abstinence, no birth control, underfunded social programs and a ban on abortions -- and expect the problem to disappear. This belief is simply wishful thinking of a fantasy world, where all humans are asexual religious prudes. Pro-lifers have a simple choice: Either support legislation that contradicts their intended goals and demonize women for receiving abortions, or seek alternative ways to address the systemic causes of the demand to terminate a pregnancy. Of course, most won’t look at these policies because being pro-life has become a litmus test for religious zeal and conservative values. But this only proves these people aren’t pro-life; they’re just pro-birth. They don’t care about the woman or the infant. They just care about forcing their views on everyone else. Abortion will never be absolutely zero. So whether you take steps to actually reduce unintended pregnancies or not, abortion must remain accessible, legal, and unrestricted.
Like (186)
Follow
Share
Hillary's Opinion
···
08/16/2019
No two bodies are exactly the same. Doctors can and should be the ones to make this decision with the patient on a case by case basis. I'm so sick of people trying to control women by enacting laws about what women can do with their bodies. Outlaw single men impregnating women they will abandon, outlaw married men having sex with and impregnating anyone but their spouse.
Like (104)
Follow
Share
Erin's Opinion
···
08/16/2019
My body my choice. Don’t force your religious beliefs on me!
Like (98)
Follow
Share

What is House Bill H.R. 784?

The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Abortions after 20 weeks would be allowed if the mother’s life is threatened by the pregnancy or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest.

This bill would require that physicians performing abortions only do so in manners which provide the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive. If the unborn child has the potential to survive outside the womb after the abortion procedure, the physician performing the abortion would be required to ensure that a second physician trained in neonatal resuscitation is present and prepared to provide care for the child. 

If a child is born alive after an abortion attempt, this bill would require any health care practitioner present at the time to render care to the child. This bill would also require that the child be immediately transported and admitted to a hospital. 

Health care practitioners and employees of hospitals, physicians' offices, or abortion clinics would be required to report any violation of this bill's provisions to the appropriate state and/or federal law enforcement agencies.

If enacted, doctors who violate the bill's requirements would face a fine, up to five years in prison, or both. A woman who receives a prohibited abortion could not be prosecuted for violating this legislation. The bill defines abortion as any medication or procedure “to intentionally kill the unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant.”

Impact

Pregnant women in the U.S., pro and anti-abortion activist groups, healthcare providers that offer abortions, hospitals that offer prenatal care, and Medicare.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 784

When this bill was introduced in the 115th Congress, the CBO estimated that it'd increase direct spending in the form of increased Medicaid coverage for additional births under the act. Depending on the number of additional births that occur under this bill, the CBO estimated costs of $65 to $335 million in the first 10 years after enactment. Using an assumption that, under the act, about three-quarters of the abortions that would occur 20 weeks or more after fertilization under current law would instead occur earlier, and the remaining one-quarter would not occur so those pregnancies would be taken to term, the CBO estimates that federal spending for Medicaid would rise by $175 million over the first 10 years after this bill's enactment.

More Information

In-Depth: Rep. Christopher Smith (R-NJ) reintroduced this bill from the 115th Congress to end abortions after 20 weeks:

“The majority of American — some 59 percent according to a recent poll — support legal protection for pain-capable unborn children. Today we know that unborn babies not only die but suffer excruciating pain during dismemberment abortion — a cruelty that rips arms and legs off a helpless child. This tragic human rights abuse must end.”

Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) sponsored this bill in the 113th, 114th, and 115th Congresses, and noted in his press release that his motivation for sponsoring this bill was to end pain for unborn babies:  

"More than 18,000 'very late term' abortions are performed every year on perfectly healthy unborn babies in America. These are innocent and defenseless children who can not only feel pain, but who can survive outside of the womb in most cases, and who are torturously killed without even basic anesthesia." 

National Right to Life supports this bill. Its legislative director, Jennifer Popik, says:

“These are very developed babies – these babies are capable of feeling pain and are considered by the medical profession to be a second patient. This legislation has saved lives, driving abortionists out of states who are performing abortions on these babies. And this legislation has the power to speak to the people of this country, highlighting, that where this bill is not law, it is legal to kill these very developed unborn children.”

National Right to Life's president, Carol Tobias, adds

“We are proud to stand with pro-life hero Congressman Smith in encouraging the U.S. House to protect pain-capable unborn children. One-fourth of premature infants now survive when born at this stage – and there is strong evidence that were a child to be aborted at that stage, they would experience great pain, as they are torn limb from limb in late abortions.”

Last Congress, the Trump administration released a statement in support of this legislation, saying that if Congress passes it in its current form President Donald Trump's advisors would recommend he sign the bill into law.

Pro-choice groups have denounced this bill as an affront to a woman's right to obtain an abortion, with Planned Parenthood tweeting that it's "unpopular" and "unconstitutional" and NARAL saying it's part of a plan by "anti-choice House Republicans" to "ban abortion outright." In the 114th Congress, NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and a coalition of 15 national religious groups opposed this bill.

Last Congress, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee argued that this bill was "patently unconstitutional" because it violated a woman's right to have an aborton prior to viability, and didn't have a health exception. The House Judiciary Democrats wrote: 

"[T]he Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act bans abortions beginning at 20 weeks after fertilization. The bill has no health exception and only an extremely narrow exception for cases where a woman’s life is endangered by a physical condition.  The bill also has woefully inadequate rape and incest exceptions.  By banning pre-viability abortions, [this bill] is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade."

This bill has 129 bipartisan cosponsors, including 128 Republicans and one Democrat, in the current Congress. Last Congress, this bill passed the House by a 237-189 vote with the support of 182 bipartisan cosponsors in the House, including 180 Republicans and two Democrats. In the 114th Congress, the House passed this bill on a 242-184 vote, but it stalled in the Senate.


Of Note: According to the Guttmacher Institute, there are 24 states that impose abortion bans after a certain number of weeks. Of those states, 17 ban abortion at about 20 weeks post-fertilization or its equivalent of 22 weeks on the grounds that the fetus can feel pain. Globally, only the U.S., Canada, North Korea, China, Singapore, Vietnam, and the Netherlands allow elective abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, according to Politifact.

Whether fetuses can feel pain at 20 weeks is debated. Pro-life advocates argue that they can; however, major medical groups, including the American Medical Association and the British Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, say the fetal nervous system isn't developed enough to feel pain before the third trimester.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / Wanmongkhol)

AKA

Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act

Official Title

To amend title 18, United States Code, to protect pain-capable unborn children, and for other purposes.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties
      Committee on the Judiciary
    IntroducedJanuary 24th, 2019
    I have just recently changed my view on abortion. Because of this reason. If the baby can feel pain...why is this still happening....I would hope you wouldn't kill and cut up an alive already born child?!?!? and anything after 20 weeks can feel the stress and trauma of pain and that's just not right....
    Like (85)
    Follow
    Share
    If you want to ACTUALLY lower the abortion rate, then demand low cost or free or OTC long lasting birth control; demand comprehensive medically and scientifically accurate sex education; and give paid maternity leave, healthcare, child care and education! Looking at some major causes of abortion and addressing its systemic issues are a far more effective in curbing abortions than banning them. Have we not learned a history lesson from prohibition? Or the current failed war on drugs? Outlawing alcohol and drugs resulted in a rise in drug addictions. The more dangerous illicit substances, the more violent crime and higher rates of addiction. America’s drug and alcohol problems didn’t just persist, they actually proliferated. Making something illegal doesn’t make the problem go away. It just fosters a criminal, unregulated market, as the demand still remains. Conservatives refuse to ban guns because they claim it won’t stop criminals from obtaining them and using them for violence. So why would they expect a ban on abortions to magically make them disappear? This type of positional inconsistency renders their political stances a bit idiotic. The Christian far right can’t have it all -- abstinence, no birth control, underfunded social programs and a ban on abortions -- and expect the problem to disappear. This belief is simply wishful thinking of a fantasy world, where all humans are asexual religious prudes. Pro-lifers have a simple choice: Either support legislation that contradicts their intended goals and demonize women for receiving abortions, or seek alternative ways to address the systemic causes of the demand to terminate a pregnancy. Of course, most won’t look at these policies because being pro-life has become a litmus test for religious zeal and conservative values. But this only proves these people aren’t pro-life; they’re just pro-birth. They don’t care about the woman or the infant. They just care about forcing their views on everyone else. Abortion will never be absolutely zero. So whether you take steps to actually reduce unintended pregnancies or not, abortion must remain accessible, legal, and unrestricted.
    Like (186)
    Follow
    Share
    No man and especially no government official including all those old white rich southern conservatives should ever have the right or the privilege to dictate to any woman what she should do with her body. A baby is born following a 40 week gestation. If it is a baby from the moment of conception it would never be 1 day old or 1 month old. It would begin life at 41 weeks old. All you conservatives who voted for this whacko should know all they want to do is control us. HANDS OFF MY BODY! Go Democrat’s 2020. GET RID OF THIS MESSED UP ADMINISTRATION. TRUMP SUCKS AND SO DOES HIS STUPID EVANGELICAL BASE. HES A PERVERT AND THEY ALLOW THAT MESSED UP BEHAVIOR JUST TO GET HIM TO BAN ABORTIONS.
    Like (175)
    Follow
    Share
    No two bodies are exactly the same. Doctors can and should be the ones to make this decision with the patient on a case by case basis. I'm so sick of people trying to control women by enacting laws about what women can do with their bodies. Outlaw single men impregnating women they will abandon, outlaw married men having sex with and impregnating anyone but their spouse.
    Like (104)
    Follow
    Share
    My body my choice. Don’t force your religious beliefs on me!
    Like (98)
    Follow
    Share
    It’s a woman’s decision and hers alone. The government, conservatives and religious types need to mind there own damn business!
    Like (78)
    Follow
    Share
    The lies and misdirection that has been propagated around anti abortion adds an extra layer of confusion making it difficult for people to think clearly about this issue. It’s the woman’s choice period, they and they alone bare the burden pregnancy inflicts and the responsibility for a child’s upbringing. Men are donors at best that can and do walk away from parental responsibility all the time.
    Like (58)
    Follow
    Share
    Unwanted pregnancies are 100% the responsibility of a man. If you want to regulate unwanted pregnancies, regulate men! See how that feels!
    Like (57)
    Follow
    Share
    Abortion is a constitutional right. Men have no place regulating women’s bodies, my uterus my choice!
    Like (49)
    Follow
    Share
    The only abortions being performed after 20 weeks are when it has become detected that something is very wrong, and the fetus isn’t compatible with life outside the womb. Unfortunately, many things aren’t detectable or even able to be tested for until the second half of pregnancy. Forcing a woman to carry to term and give birth when she knows her child will have a short, pain filled life is cruel to everyone involved.
    Like (48)
    Follow
    Share
    Get the fuck out of women’s uterus!!!!!!!
    Like (42)
    Follow
    Share
    Government, stay out of my healthcare decisions! It’s between me and my doctor.
    Like (38)
    Follow
    Share
    Cherie65, you lie! The Democratic party absolutely is not "into" nor does it endorse, approve, or embrace infanticide in any way, shape or form. And Countable needs to crack down on people like you who throw out slanderous lies deliberately designed to incite hatred against specific people within a political party. Do you even know the definition of infanticide? The definition of infanticide is: 1. the crime of killing a child within a year of birth. 2. a person who kills an infant, especially their own child. So basically you're accusing the people within the Democratic party of applauding the murdering of children within one year of their birth. Do you realize how utterly wrong, deeply sick and monstrous that false accusation is? And your lie speaks volumes about your character. The Democratic party is not even pro-abortion, knowing how horrifically difficult and heart rending such a decision would be. The decision to abort should never, ever, EVER be taken lightly. The Democratic Party does, however, endorse the concept of pro-choice. The freedom to choose to do that which one deems the best choice for their circumstances, health, and life. There is a huge chasm between being pro-abortion and pro-choice. Being pro-abortion is just that, advocating for abortion whenever the desire to have one arises for no reason at all. Being pro-choice can apply to abortion and anything else, in addition. It's about taking in all options and weighing them carefully before using your freedom to choose. Pro-choice in healthcare insurance, pro-choice in religions, pro-choice in colleges. Pro-choice in medical procedures such as an abortion. Pro-choice means the freedom to choose an option that best fits the circumstances for that person. For a party that consistently advocates for freedom and liberty and small government, you people seem to enjoy taking freedom and liberty away from others, while loving expanded government in ways that you think will affect others but not you. I reiterate: The Democratic party absolutely is not "into" nor does it endorse, approve, or embrace infanticide in any way, shape or form. And Countable needs to crack down on people like you who throw out slanderous lies deliberately designed to incite hatred and possibly violence against specific people within a political party. These kind of lies that you perpetrate are the kind of lies that crazies with semi automatics gravitate towards.
    Like (35)
    Follow
    Share
    The government should stay out of a woman ‘s vagina
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    No doctor is cutting up and brutally murdering fetuses. The fetus dies instantly w/ D&Es. Late term abortions are sometimes done to preserve the woman’s health or due to serious medical issues with the fetus, like congenital heart defects, which may significantly lower, or eliminate, chances of survival. If this is outlawed, women will die. We need to let the doctors do their job, stop trying to control what women do with their bodies, and uphold the constitutional separation of church and state.
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    Government needs to stay completely out of the reproductive / medical business of people. The end.
    Like (31)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is an attempt by yet another male legislator to deny women the right to control their own bodies. The decision to continue a pregnancy or not should be strictly up to a woman and her doctor - not arbitrarily dictated by a blanket law. Women do not chose abortion easily or casually, and certainly do not do so later in pregnancy. Such later abortions are often because the fetus has a problem that will cause more pain and suffering to both it and it’s mother if carried to term. Whatever the reason may be, trust that for that woman with that pregnancy, it is a valid one. If you want to limit abortions, make birth control free and easy to access. To my Congressional representatives: please do NOT support this bill.
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    Ok it’s just a medical procedure, but then execution is also just a medical procedure. The result is the same only the child is innocent
    Like (30)
    Follow
    Share
    👍🏻 House Bill H.T. 784 The Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act 👍🏻 I’m in strong support of and recommend the passage of the “Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act” which would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Abortions after 20 weeks would be allowed if the mother’s life is threatened by the pregnancy or if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest. Unborn babies can feel pain after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Abortions outside of that timeframe should be outlawed to ensure the safety and well-being of unborn life. SneakyPete...... 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻. 8.16.19.....
    Like (27)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a medical decision between doctor & patient. Government has no business regulating medical decisions. To do so is nothing but Christian Sharia Law in violation is f the separation between church & state!
    Like (27)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE