Subscriber login

Letters to the Editor
What you need to know for 07/26/2017

Abortion foes are wrong about when a fetus can feel pain

Abortion foes are wrong about when a fetus can feel pain

*Abortion foes are wrong about when a fetus can feel pain *Letter distorted efforts by Ballston park

Abortion foes are wrong about when a fetus can feel pain

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) recently advanced the “Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.” This legislation is similar to that passed by the Republican-led House earlier this year and would ban abortions after 20 weeks except in cases of rape, incest with a minor, or in order to save the life of the pregnant woman. If passed, the act would result in up to five years in jail for violators.

Graham claims there is scientific evidence that a fetus can feel pain in the 20th week of pregnancy and also implied that such a fetus would experience significant pain during an abortion. His claims require comment. First, regarding fetal pain, a comprehensive review of all relevant literature has been published in the Journal of the American Medical Association with the conclusion that: “Evidence regarding the capacity for fetal pain is limited but indicates that fetal perception of pain is unlikely before the third trimester.”

Independently, a review written by a panel appointed by Britain’s Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists concluded that nerve connections “to the cortex are not intact before 24 weeks of gestation.”

Thus, most scientific evidence does not support the claim that a fetus can experience pain in the 20th week.

Second, if someone was concerned about possible fetal pain during a late-term abortion, there are several options. One option is to inject a drug that quietly stops the fetal heart. Many late-term abortions involve such a procedure. Another is to use anesthesia.

The Republican Party continues its strategy to involve government in a women’s medical decisions. As is the case for men, a women’s medical decisions should involve only the patient and the physician, not the government.

Don Steiner


Letter distorted efforts by Ballston park group

In her Nov. 5 letter falsely describing efforts by the Ballston Town Board and Park and Recreation Committee (P&RC), Polly Windels mentioned a lawsuit. The P&RC has no involvement in, nor is aware of, any lawsuit.

Ms. Windels claims the P&RC wants a sports complex like Clifton Park. (Sounds like she does not like Clifton Park.) The P&RC was not in favor of a complex such as Clifton Park’s, and did not recommend any such complex. While they have a wonderful complex, it is not appropriate for the town of Ballston. The P&RC proposed a parking lot, a nature hiking trail and picnic tables.

Ms. Windels claims the only statement in the will [deeding park land to the town] is “forever wild.” The will actually states: “The park is to remain forever wild, except for improvements consistent with recreational purposes dedicated to public use.” The P&RC expects any improvements to be consistent with recreational purposes dedicated to public use. The P&RC proposed a parking lot, a nature hiking trail, and picnic tables.

Ms. Windels claims the [Schidzick] estate offered to purchase the Hawkwood estate. The P&RC sent letters (twice) to all property owners of more than 15 acres during the evaluation process. There was no reply from the Hawkwood estate. Further, the estate has had over 10 years to provide a property and has made no effort to do so.

The P&RC was created by the Town Board is response to this inaction, and at the request of the court for Ballston to show interest and progress. The P&RC has performed this effort in full openness, professionalism and honesty.

The park will be a wonderful addition to the town, which is severely lacking park space. The P&RC is sincerely indebted to Frank W. Schidzick for his insight and dedication to such a magnificent gift to the town.

Daniel Russell


The writer is chairman of the Park and Recreation Committee.

ACA: one screw-up and lie after another

Since the roll out of the website, it’s been one screw-up after another and one excuse after another to cover the screw-ups.

I just went to a site where they were trying to explain what they are doing about it so they can get it up and running soon. I will quote just one line: “Our team is bringing in some of the best and brightest from both inside and outside government to scrub in with the team and help improve” What does this imply? That they’ve had a bunch of inept morons working on this at taxpayers’ expense.

This whole Affordable Healthcare Act [ACA] was built on a total lie told by the president over and over, and we all know what that lie was. Now millions are having their policies cancelled and are being forced to buy more expensive insurance plans because that’s how AHC was set up to work. Someone has to pay for someone else to be insured so it’s nothing more than another tax being imposed on the middle class — what Obama likes to call paying your fair share.

It’s nothing more than wealth redistribution.

Alice Baum


Letters Policy

The Gazette wants your opinions on public issues.

There is no strict word limit, though letters under 200 words are preferred.

All letters are subject to editing for length, style and fairness, and we will run no more than one letter per month from the same writer.

Please include your signature, address and day phone for verification.

For information on how to send, see bottom of this page.

For more letters, visit our Web site:

View Comments
Hide Comments
0 premium 1 premium 2 premium 3 premium 4 premium 5 premium 6 premium 7 premium article articles remaining SUBSCRIBE TODAY

You have reached your monthly premium content limit.

Continue to enjoy Daily Gazette premium content by becoming a subscriber.
Already a subscriber? Log In