【medical-news】堕胎——上限划在哪里？-2010-07-24 12:45:54 AM
Main Category: Abortion News
Article Date: 11 Feb 2007 - 16:00 PST
The 40th anniersary in October this year of the passing of the UK Abortion Act is certain to be marked by attempts to reopen the debate about lowering the upper limit for legal terminations. In a special report in this week's BMJ, journalist Jonathan Gornall examines current arguments for reform.
Any challenge to the upper limit of 24 weeks poses big questions about iability, infant suffering, and the capabilities of neonatal care, writes Gornall - and the danger is that this ital debate is taking place increasingly on emotional rather than scientific grounds.
The ProLife Alliance can take much of the credit for haing put abortion back on the public and political agenda oer the past decade. The organisation was set up in 1996 as a political party to show "the reality of abortion" and was also behind the ultimately failed attempt in 2003 by Joanna Jepson, a trainee icar, to hae police prosecute two doctors oer the late abortion of a fetus with a cleft lip and palate.
Now the alliance has turned its attention away from pictures of dead babies to 4D ultrasound images of lie ones in the womb.
The technique was pioneered by Stuart Campbell, head of obstetrics and gynaecology at St George's Hospital, London, who is coninced that his 4D images hae undermined the alidity of the current time limit for abortion.
But Maria Fitzgerald, professor of deelopmental neurobiology at Uniersity College London and scientific director of the WellChild Pain Research Centre says it is wrong to suggest that the fetus might feel pain in the same way as the born child.
But whether or not fetuses feel pain in the same way as infants, another debate is raging oer the surial rates of extremely premature infants and the iability of such suriors.
The British Medical Association beliees that the 1967 Abortion Act is a humane piece of legislation, and guidelines recently issued by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics suggest that below 22 weeks, "no baby should be resuscitated." Its proposals came as a disappointment to anti-abortion campaigners.
Most recently, the anti-choice lobby has been emphasising the risk to the physical or mental health of women who hae abortions.
If the upper limit for abortion is reduced this year, it seems it will be in response to public opinion informed not by scientific and medical realities but by sentimental pictures - and on the back of occasionally misleading polls, writes Gornall.
A Conseratie MP is currently promoting a bill to reduce the abortion limit to 20 weeks, and this seems to represent the anti-choice lobby's best chance of lowering the upper limit in the act's anniersary year. But there is concern that her position seems to reflect the ethical and medical confusion that threatens to oerwhelm clear debate in the year ahead.
Forty years after the law was changed, the pro-choice lobby ask why shouldn't abortion be treated like any other operation, where the doctor gies one the information to make an informed choice about whether to undergo surgery? They beliee we need to moe the focus from the fetus to the woman, Gornall concludes.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=62668
堕胎——上限划在哪里？
Main Category: Abortion News
Article Date: 11 Feb 2007 - 16:00 PST
发表日期：2007.2.11
The 40th anniersary in October this year of the passing of the UK Abortion Act is certain to be marked by attempts to reopen the debate about lowering the upper limit for legal terminations. In a special report in this week's BMJ, journalist Jonathan Gornall examines current arguments for reform.
今年十月,英国堕胎法通过40周年纪念，肯定会由于试图重开关于降低法定中止妊娠上限的讨论而变得醒目。这周的BMJ中的一篇特殊报道，记者Jonathan Gornall调查了目前对于这项改革的争论。
Any challenge to the upper limit of 24 weeks poses big questions about iability, infant suffering, and the capabilities of neonatal care, writes Gornall - and the danger is that this ital debate is taking place increasingly on emotional rather than scientific grounds.
Gornall写道，任何对24周上限的挑战都提出一个关于生育力，婴儿遭受痛苦，和新生期护理能力方面的大问题，---而且危险是这项关于生命的讨论正在逐渐发生在情绪方面而非科学领域。
The ProLife Alliance can take much of the credit for haing put abortion back on the public and political agenda oer the past decade. The organisation was set up in 1996 as a political party to show "the reality of abortion" and was also behind the ultimately failed attempt in 2003 by Joanna Jepson, a trainee icar, to hae police prosecute two doctors oer the late abortion of a fetus with a cleft lip and palate.
在过去的十年中ProLife联盟可因为向民众和政治议程上提出推迟堕胎而获得赞誉。这个组织成立于1996年，作为一个政治团体展示“堕胎的真实性”，最终也以2003年由一位实习牧师Joanna Jepson起诉两名医生对一个有唇裂和腭裂的胎儿进行晚期堕胎的失败尝试告终。
Now the alliance has turned its attention away from pictures of dead babies to 4D ultrasound images of lie ones in the womb.
现在联盟已经将它的注意力从对死亡婴儿的想像转向了子宫中存活婴儿的4D超声影像。
The technique was pioneered by Stuart Campbell, head of obstetrics and gynaecology at St George's Hospital, London, who is coninced that his 4D images hae undermined the alidity of the current time limit for abortion.
这项技术由圣乔治医院的产科学和妇科学的主任Stuart Campbell开创，他确信他的4D影像已经暗中破坏了目前堕胎期限的可靠性。
But Maria Fitzgerald, professor of deelopmental neurobiology at Uniersity College London and scientific director of the WellChild Pain Research Centre says it is wrong to suggest that the fetus might feel pain in the same way as the born child.
但是伦敦大学的发育神经生物学教授和健康儿童痛感研究中心的科学主任Maria Fitzgerald说，指出胎儿可能以出生婴儿同样的方式感受痛苦的说法是错误的。
But whether or not fetuses feel pain in the same way as infants, another debate is raging oer the surial rates of extremely premature infants and the iability of such suriors.
但不管胎儿是否和婴儿以同样方式感受痛苦，另一项讨论主要关于特别是早产儿的成活率及这些存活者的生存能力。
The British Medical Association beliees that the 1967 Abortion Act is a humane piece of legislation, and guidelines recently issued by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics suggest that below 22 weeks, "no baby should be resuscitated." Its proposals came as a disappointment to anti-abortion campaigners.
英国医学会相信1967年的堕胎法案是一项人道的立法，并且最近由生物伦理学的Nuffield Council发行的指南建议堕胎要低于22周，“没有婴儿应该被复活。”它的提议对反堕胎人士来说是个失望。
Most recently, the anti-choice lobby has been emphasising the risk to the physical or mental health of women who hae abortions.
最近，反堕胎人士已经强调了对于接受堕胎的妇女身体或者精神健康的风险。
If the upper limit for abortion is reduced this year, it seems it will be in response to public opinion informed not by scientific and medical realities but by sentimental pictures - and on the back of occasionally misleading polls, writes Gornall.
Gornall写道，如果今年降低堕胎的上限似乎将适应民众的意见，这种意见不是通过科学和医学的真实性，而是通过感伤的图像被告知---而且在偶然的背后是令人误解的民意测验。
A Conseratie MP is currently promoting a bill to reduce the abortion limit to 20 weeks, and this seems to represent the anti-choice lobby's best chance of lowering the upper limit in the act's anniersary year. But there is concern that her position seems to reflect the ethical and medical confusion that threatens to oerwhelm clear debate in the year ahead.
保守党下院议员目前正促进一项法案来降低堕胎限度到20周，并且这似乎代表了反堕胎人士在法案周年纪念上降低上限的最好选择。但是让人忧虑的是她的职位似乎反映了伦理学和医学的混乱，这有掩盖这一年之前明确争论的危险。
Forty years after the law was changed, the pro-choice lobby ask why shouldn't abortion be treated like any other operation, where the doctor gies one the information to make an informed choice about whether to undergo surgery? They beliee we need to moe the focus from the fetus to the woman, Gornall concludes.
在这项法律改变后40年，堕胎赞成派议员问，为什么堕胎不能象其他手术一样通过医生提供给病人信息由病人来决定是否进行手术？Gornall得出结论，他们相信我们需要将焦点从胎儿身上转移到妇女身上。
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=62668
堕胎——上限划在哪里？
发表日期：2007.2.11
今年是英国堕胎法通过40周年。而关于是否应降低堕胎是合法上限的争论，又有复燃之势，这势必将为十月份的40周年纪念添上浓墨重彩的一笔。这周BMJ的一篇特殊报道，记者Jonathan Gornall调查了目前对于这项改革的争论。
Gornall写道，任何对24周上限的挑战都涉及诸多重大问题：婴儿生存能力，痛苦程度，新生儿期护理难度等。---而危险是，这项关乎生死的辩论越来越多不是基于科学基础上，而情绪渐渐占了上风。
在过去十年中ProLife联盟因为向民众和在政治议程上提出推迟堕胎而获得赞誉。这个成立于1996年作为一个政治团体展示“堕胎的真实面目”。2003年一位实习牧师Joanna Jepson起诉两名医生对一个有唇裂和腭裂的胎儿进行晚期堕胎而以失败告终，该组织是这起诉讼的支持者。
现在联盟已经将它的注意力从对死亡婴儿的想像转向了子宫中存活婴儿的4D超声影像。
这项技术由圣乔治医院产科和妇科主任Stuart Campbell开创，他确信他的4D影像已经挑战了目前堕胎期限的可靠性。
但是伦敦大学的发育神经生物学教授和健康儿童痛感研究中心的科学主任Maria Fitzgerald说，指出胎儿可能以出生婴儿同样方式感受痛苦的说法是错误的。
但不管胎儿是否和婴儿以同样方式感受痛苦，另一项讨论主要是关于特别是早产儿的成活率及这些存活者的生存能力问题。
英国医学会相信1967年的堕胎法案是一项人道的立法，并且最近由生物伦理学的Nuffield Council发行的指南建议,对于低于22周的婴儿“不应进行复苏”。该提议对反堕胎人士来说是令人失望的消息。
最近，反堕胎人士已经强调了堕胎对于妇女身体或者精神健康方面的危险。
Gornall写道，如果今年堕胎的上限被下调，这似乎是顺应公众意见，或是基于一些民意查结果。但公众更多是受煽情的图片的影响而并不了解科学和医学上的真实情况，而民意测验有时是有误导性的。
一名保守党下院议员目前正促进一项法案来降低堕胎限度到20周，这似乎是反堕胎人士在法案周年纪念上降低上限的最佳机会。但是让人忧虑的是她的（尴尬）处境似乎反映了伦理学和医学的混乱，将来的一年里这种混乱很可能持续下去而得不到明确的争论结果。
在这项法律改变后40年，堕胎赞成派议员问，为什么堕胎不能象其他手术一样通过医生提供给病人信息由病人来决定是否进行手术？Gornall得出结论，他们相信我们需要将焦点从胎儿身上转移到妇女身上。
“但是让人忧虑的是她的位置似乎反映了伦理学和医学的混乱，这种混乱的威胁压倒了前半年的明确争论。”这句什么意思？
“为什么堕胎不能象任何其他的手术一样来处理，医生提供给病人来决定是否要接受手术的信息在哪？”也不是很理解
谁帮我解释一下？
这样译会不会好理解些：
保守党下院议员目前正促进一项法案将堕胎限度降低到20周，而且这似乎代表了反对派议员在法案周年纪念上降低上限的最好选择。但是让人忧虑的是她的职位似乎反映了伦理学和医学的混乱，这有掩盖此年之前明确争论的危险。
为什么堕胎不能象其他手术一样通过医生提供给病人信息由病人来决定是否进行手术？
pro-life
反堕胎的;主张保护胎儿权利的
pro-choice
主张堕胎合法化的;主张妇女有权选择堕胎与否的
人流赞成派被称作pro-choice，反对派则为pro-life
有关对于这两种观点的讨论及链接：
http://blog.hjenglish.com/luodean/archie/2004/01/11/1104.aspx
pro-choice：赞成堕胎的。
围绕着abortion(人工流产)的合法化问题，美国人的意见恰好分为两派。赞成派和反对派相互对立，为争夺美国社会主导权的斗争不断扩大。人流赞成派被称作pro-choice，反对派则为pro-life.
pro-choice派的人认为，堕胎与否应该让妇女自己来自由判断。把pro-choice翻译成“堕胎合法化赞成派的”也是可以的。
堕胎： Pro-life 与 pro-choice立场
反堕胎人士（Pro-life）一般是共和党人：生命是神圣的，受精卵也是生命，不许堕胎！
pro-choice的人士一般是民主党人：女人对她的身体是有主权的。如果堕胎这样一个问题上不能相信一个女人自己的决定，那如何又能相信她培育生命的决定？
http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/iewthread.php?tid=524991
堕胎 =abortion
pro-life = anti abortion
pro-choice = for abortion
pro-life:崇尚生命的(所以是反堕胎的); pro-choice:崇尚自由选择的(所以是支持堕胎的)
those two nouns are used only in the USA for the past 33 years since Roe s Wade supreme court ruling and the Catholics against the abortionists. They are not used any other place else. Later the Catholics used the term pro-life instead of anti-abortion in that it sounds better in politics. The abortionist used the term pro-choice and it sounds better than abortion-people whom most citizens tied with "killers of unborn-babies" .
Pro-choice is not the same as pro-abortion!! It means pro-choice, giing a woman and her family the right to choose what she thinks is best for her (family's) situation. The choice is not always to hae an abortion.
Een people who are pro-choice beliee that there should be 'as few abortions as possible'. Ideally there wouldn't (hae to) be any abortions but an ideal is seldom, if eer, achieed. Pro-choice beliees that the woman should hae the right to make this difficult decision.
http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/48c999f1010008tz
杂谈美国政治：NY参议员Chuck Schumer，选举政治
堕胎问题，左派是pro-choice，认为群众应该有权选择堕胎；右派认为，应该pro-life，堕胎是杀人，不负责任，不道德的。
http://baike.baidu.com/iew/65557.htm
自由主义：
在欧洲和美国，自由主义通常支持自由选择运动（pro-choice），主张给予妇女选择堕胎与否的权利，以及支持同性恋权利。
水平还不够。
请诸位大侠指教，来修正啊！
Are you pro-choice or pro-life?
重选择自由？重生命权利？
孰轻孰重？母亲？孩子？
唉，哪有说的清的道理呢。
这里的position翻译成职位，可能会更好理解一点把
Forty years after the law was changed, the pro-choice lobby ask why shouldn't abortion be treated like any other operation, where the doctor gies one the information to make an informed choice about whether to undergo surgery?
这里的where不是哪里的意思把，我觉得只是个连词啊，就是指代any other operation，不知道对不对，大家一块讨论一下，共同提高啊^_^
已经修改。谢谢你！
今年十月,英国堕胎法通过40周年纪念，肯定会由于试图重开关于降低法定中止妊娠上限的讨论而变得醒目。
今年是英国堕胎法通过40周年。而关于是否应降低堕胎是合法上限的争论，又有复燃之势，这势必将为十月份的40周年纪念添上浓墨重彩的一笔。
Any challenge to the upper limit of 24 weeks poses big questions about iability, infant suffering, and the capabilities of neonatal care, writes Gornall - and the danger is that this ital debate is taking place increasingly on emotional rather than scientific grounds.
Gornall写道，任何对24周上限的挑战都提出一个关于生育力，婴儿遭受痛苦，和新生期护理能力方面的大问题，---而且危险是这项关于生命的讨论正在逐渐发生在情绪方面而非科学领域。
ornall写道，任何对24周上限的挑战都涉及诸多重大问题：婴儿生存能力，痛苦程度，新生儿期护理难度等。---而危险是，这项关乎生死的辩论越来越多不是基于科学基础上，而情绪渐渐占了上风。
as a political party to show "the reality of abortion" and was also behind the ultimately failed attempt in 2003 by Joanna Jepson, a trainee icar, to hae police prosecute two doctors oer the late abortion of a fetus with a cleft lip and palate.
作为一个政治团体展示“堕胎的真实性”，最终也以2003年由一位实习牧师Joanna Jepson起诉两名医生对一个有唇裂和腭裂的胎儿进行晚期堕胎的失败尝试告终。
作为一个政治团体展示“堕胎的真实面目”。2003年一位实习牧师Joanna Jepson起诉两名医生对一个有唇裂和腭裂的胎儿进行晚期堕胎而以失败告终，该组织是这起诉讼的支持者。
who is coninced that his 4D images hae undermined the alidity of the current time limit for abortion.
他确信他的4D影像已经暗中破坏了目前堕胎期限的可靠性。
他确信他的4D影像已经挑战了目前堕胎期限的可靠性。
and guidelines recently issued by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics suggest that below 22 weeks, "no baby should be resuscitated." Its proposals came as a disappointment to anti-abortion campaigners.
并且最近由生物伦理学的Nuffield Council发行的指南建议堕胎要低于22周，“没有婴儿应该被复活。”它的提议对反堕胎人士来说是个失望。
并且最近由生物伦理学的Nuffield Council发行的指南建议,对于低于22周的婴儿“不应进行复苏”。该提议对反堕胎人士来说是令人失望的消息。
If the upper limit for abortion is reduced this year, it seems it will be in response to public opinion informed not by scientific and medical realities but by sentimental pictures - and on the back of occasionally misleading polls, writes Gornall.
Gornall写道，如果今年降低堕胎的上限似乎将适应民众的意见，这种意见不是通过科学和医学的真实性，而是通过感伤的图像被告知---而且在偶然的背后是令人误解的民意测验。
Gornall写道，如果今年堕胎的上限被下调，这似乎是顺应公众意见，或是基于一些民意查结果。但公众更多是受煽情的图片的影响而并不了解科学和医学上的真实情况，而民意测验有时是有误导性的。
A Conseratie MP is currently promoting a bill to reduce the abortion limit to 20 weeks, and this seems to represent the anti-choice lobby's best chance of lowering the upper limit in the act's anniersary year. But there is concern that her position seems to reflect the ethical and medical confusion that threatens to oerwhelm clear debate in the year ahead.
保守党下院议员目前正促进一项法案来降低堕胎限度到20周，并且这似乎代表了反堕胎人士在法案周年纪念上降低上限的最好选择。但是让人忧虑的是她的职位似乎反映了伦理学和医学的混乱，这有掩盖这一年之前明确争论的危险。
一名保守党下院议员目前正促进一项法案来降低堕胎限度到20周，这似乎是反堕胎人士在法案周年纪念上降低上限的最佳机会。但是让人忧虑的是她的（尴尬）处境似乎反映了伦理学和医学的混乱，将来的一年里这种混乱很可能持续下去而得不到明确的争论结果。
Ps:这里的conseratie MP是特指Nadine Dorries,详见：
http://www.abortionrights.org.uk/content/iew/159/1/
there is a passage about my major ,i want to share it with others 1
thank you !
乳腺增生病与乳腺癌的关系.pdf (229.75k)
我按你的意见在编译中修改了，中英对照中没有修改，大家可以对比着学习。 谢谢你！
gujiwei1978：
附件上传好像有问题，打不开的！
发表者QINQIN 时间 2010-07-24 12:45:54 AM
0 条评论
【medical-news】孕期糖尿病会损害婴儿记忆功能
【medical-news】研究发现新药物Avastin有助于脑部肿瘤的治疗
【社会人文】儿童出现外伤会影响其父母健康
【bio-news】研究显示肝是使用病毒载体进行癌基因治疗的理想靶点
【科普】美容用品中的茶树油可导致细菌对抗生素耐药
【medical-news】再次肝移植带来的启示
【bio-news】早期哺乳动物丢失的基因是否具有夜视能力？
【medical-news】吗啡缓释剂减轻顽固性咳嗽
【medical-news】40岁及以上孕妇发生死胎或死产的风险增加
【medical-news】肺癌普查工作中，过度诊断现象十分普遍
©2001-2010 cadjy.com 闽ICP备09012749号 联系我们室内装修 手机维修