I stand corrected. But again, as you point out, Women of her age generally have such tests.
On Sep 9, 12:37 pm, Cold Water <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually, there really aren't "many" reasons a woman would have an > amniocentesis. The test is recommended for all pregnant women over the age > of 35. > "There are three purposes of prenatal diagnosis: (1) to enable timely medical > or surgical treatment of a condition before or after birth, (2) to give the > parents the chance to abort a fetus with the diagnosed condition, and (3) to > give parents the chance to "prepare" for a baby with a health problem or > disability, or for the likelihood of a stillbirth." > > The risk of amniocentesis-related miscarriage is generally thought to be 1 in > 200,[2] although a recent study has indicated this may actually be much > lower, perhaps 1 in 1,600.[2] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amniocentesis > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "PoliticalForum" <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 3:13 PM > Subject: Re: Sarah Palin's Lies About her "Pregnancy" with Trig > > Gaar, no wonder you're a Republican. I never said there weren't many > reason women may want to have amniocentesis.(although I don't agree > with your statement, especially with the word "many") What I said was > that it INCREASES the chance of your baby DYING. It seems that you > can't put two and two together. > > On Sep 9, 11:46 am, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are many reasons a Woman her age would have such a test. > > > On Sep 9, 7:07 am, J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Gaar, people who are truly anti-abortion , as I am, do not ever > > > consider amniocentesis. We protect our children at all stages of life. > > > Amniocentesis increases the chance that your child will be killed in > > > the womb. If you care about your child, amniocentesis does not make > > > any sense. > > > > On Sep 8, 4:17 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/08/us/politics/08baby.html?_r=1&hp=&ad... > > > > > A few weeks later, after an amniocentesis, a prenatal test to identify > > > > genetic defects, Ms. Palin learned the results. Some abortion > > > > opponents decline such tests, but as her older sister, Heather Bruce, > > > > said, Ms. Palin “likes to be prepared.” With her husband, Todd, away > > > > at his job in the oil fields of the North Slope, Ms. Palin told no one > > > > for three days, she later said. > > > > > Once they reunited, the Palins struggled to understand what they would > > > > face. Children with Down syndrome experience varying degrees of > > > > cognitive disability and a higher-than-average risk of hearing loss, > > > > hypothyroidism and seizure disorders. About half are born with heart > > > > defects, which often require surgery. > > > > > The couple decided to keep quiet about the pregnancy so they could > > > > absorb the news, they told people later. > > > > > And there were political factors to consider. “I didn’t want Alaskans > > > > to fear I would not be able to fulfill my duties,” Ms. Palin told > > > > People magazine last week. > > > > > The governor, thin to begin with, began an elaborate game of fashion- > > > > assisted camouflage. When Vogue photographed her, five months > > > > pregnant, for a profile in January, she hid in a big green parka. At > > > > work, she wore long, loose blazers and artfully draped accessories. > > > > > “All of a sudden she had this penchant for really beautiful scarves,” > > > > recalled Angelina Burney, who works across the hallway from the > > > > governor in Anchorage. > > > > > As Ms. Palin’s clothes grew tighter, Alaskans began to talk. She told > > > > several aides that she was pregnant, and a week or so later, her > > > > parents and her children, who called other relatives. > > > > > On Sep 8, 12:48 pm, PoliticalAmazon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > According to Sarah Palin, she didn't tell anyone, and no one, > > > > > including her husband, knew about her pregnancy with Trig until she > > > > > was 7 months along. > > > > > >http://www.docstoc.com/docs/1083892/Sarah-Palin-Pregnant-with-Track-P... > > > > > > This is a picture that shows her pregnant with Track in 1989, at 7 > > > > > months. > > > > > > The idea that she was able to hide a pregnancy until 7 months, even > > > > > from her husband (who had already experieced 4 of her pregnancies, and > > > > > certainly could recognize the changes that accompany pregnacy), did > > > > > not realize she was pregnant is ludicrous. It is an insult to America > > > > > to be told such an obvious lie. > > > > > > In addition, if she was that big with Track at 7 months, by the time > > > > > she was supposedly onto her 5th pregnancy, she would have been at > > > > > least as big as a single-wide. Subsequent pregnancies usually show > > > > > earlier and more than the initial pregnancy. > > > > > > That the GOP would consider such a liar and scandal-ridden person as > > > > > Sarah Palin as VP is also an insult to America. The GOP has nearly > > > > > destroyed our country with their Bush Jr pick. Do they really want to > > > > > finish the job with McCain-Palin?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
