Anne Davis in her letter ("Cuomo's equality agenda does create clarity," June 1) indicates clarity is "desperately" needed in New York's laws to facilitate abortion for a woman's life and health. Let's be clear: If a woman's life is in danger, no limitations exist in New York to prevent abortion, so what else is needed?
The vagueness of the word "health" used in the abortion provision of the Women's Equality Act needs to be dispelled.
If "health" means a woman "facing the stress of having to subject herself to childbirth when she changes her mind late in pregnancy," that should be stated.
No limitations exist in the state on abortions for any reason through the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.
The mortality rate of late-term abortions is significantly higher than those done earlier in a pregnancy. A study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2004 looked at data from its Abortion Mortality Surveillance System for 1988-97, finding the risk of death increased by 38 percent for each additional week of gestation.
The study specifically found the overall death rate for women obtaining legally induced abortions was 76.6 per 100,000 at or after 21 weeks. To me, that means inducing labor after 24 weeks of pregnancy (and then caring for mother and child) is safer than killing the child in utero. The child could then be adopted by a family who is desperate to have him or her. The child does not need to die to protect the mother's health.
We do need to be clear about what is being proposed. We also need to ask whether it is really better for women's health.
Karen Dalton, M.D.
Rochester