Opposition to abortion related to inaccurate beliefs about fetal pain perception in utero.

BACKGROUND: Misinformation about abortion and pregnancy is common. Restrictions on abortion access at and beyond 20 weeks are frequently justified using the claim that a fetus can experience pain before the third trimester. The current medical consensus is that it is unlikely that fetal pain perception is possible before the 29th or 30th weeks of pregnancy. AIMS: To examine the relationship between abortion attitudes and beliefs about when a fetus develops the capacity to perceive pain in utero. METHODS AND MATERIALS: We used Amazon's Mechanical Turk to recruit participants residing in the United States (N = 374) and used an online questionnaire to assess their beliefs about abortion and the ability of a fetus to perceive pain. RESULTS: Anti-choice participants were more likely than pro-choice participants to believe that a fetus in utero can perceive pain before the 23rd week of pregnancy (63.4 vs. 48.5%, P = 0.010) and in the first trimester (40.1 vs. 15.8%, P < 0.000). Most Black and Catholic participants, along with those with advanced degrees, believed that fetal pain is not possible before the third trimester. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants believed that a fetus develops the capacity to perceive pain earlier than developmental reality, and this belief correlates with anti-choice views.

The selective use of rapid aneuploidy screening in prenatal diagnosis.

AIMS: To evaluate the diagnostic utility and costing of the selective use of rapid aneuploidy screening (RAS) for chorion villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis specimens. METHODS: CVS and amniocenteses performed between 2000 and 2006 were identified. Cases were subdivided into two groups: (i) RAS in addition to long-term culture and (ii) long-term chromosome culture alone. The frequency of RAS, the proportion of abnormal results and the cytogenetic costings were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 3315 procedures were performed: 730 CVS and 2585 amniocenteses. An abnormal karyotype culture was present in 366 of 3315 (11%). For CVS an abnormal culture was present in 164 (22.5%). RAS (short-term culture/direct preparation) was selectively used in 399 cases (54.6%) with an abnormal result in 128 (32% of RAS). For amniocentesis, 206 chromosome abnormalities were present (8.0% of specimens). RAS (interphase FISH) was selectively used in 580 amniocenteses (22.4%). FISH was requested in 95 (66.4%) of the 143 abnormal cases potentially detectable with standard probes. There was a progressive increase in utilisation of RAS for amniocentesis (8.9% in 2000 to 43.3% of cases in 2006, P < 0.001). CVS RAS was stable. This liberalisation resulted in a fourfold increase in expenditure for FISH and cost/abnormality detected ($A970 per abnormal result in 2000 to $A4015 per abnormal result in 2006). CONCLUSION: The selective use of prenatal RAS results in a reasonably high detection rate for chromosomal anomalies. Liberalisation of RAS, however, is an expensive cytogenetic model. An approach based on some predictive level of risk combined with resource funding levels may be a more pragmatic approach.