The language of intact dilation and extraction

On April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court upheld the ‘Partial birth abortion act of 2003’ passed by congress to limit the use of an abortion procedure known in the medical community as intact dilation and extraction, which is a late term procedure that involves the removal of an intact, but lifeless fetus from the uterus. The procedure itself is rarely used in the United States, and is very rarely the only option.

Politicians and conservative religious groups successfully coined the term ‘partial birth abortion’ in order to represent this medical procedure in a non-specific way in order to illicit an emotional response from the American public and to build support against it. Recent legislation around the topic is now being used, in the views of many, to begin to reverse the abortion policy in the United States established by Roe vs. Wade that upholds abortion rights for a woman based on the principle that the well being of the mother must come first.

The term intact dilation and extraction, which is the recognized medical procedure is sterile in its nature, and intentionally does not draw attention to itself. The medical community uses this type of language to help protect itself and to maintain a doctors ability to make safe medical decisions with their patients that do not suffer from political interference. By using more graphic wording around the topic, like referring to the procedure as “slaying a healthy, nearly born baby by stabbing it in the head…” instead of “partial evacuation of the intracranial contents of the fetus to effect vaginal delivery,” the self termed ‘pro-life’ community has been able to use the power of language to take a little used, medical procedure and turn it into a major media issue and campaign fodder, possibly at the expense of mothers whose lives will be endangered by this ban.