Actually there is no reason it wouldn't be an option.
Obviously she would need to have someone lined up who would be willing to pay the expenses but if she did not want to keep the child and there was someone else who wanted to adopt it there would be no reason she could not give it up.
Just because you say it is not an option does not mean it is not an option.
You show me ONE doctor who is willing to induce labor at 22 weeks ELECTIVELY. There is too much risk involved.
Prematurity
"However, whether or not a premature infant will survive is still intimately tied to his or her gestational age:
21 weeks or less: 0% survival rate
22 weeks: 0-10% survival rate
23 weeks: 10-35% survival rate
24 weeks: 40-70% survival rate
25 weeks: 50-80% survival rate
26 weeks: 80-90% survival rate
27 weeks: greater than 90% survival rate
Physicians cannot predict long-term complications of prematurity; some consequences may not become evident until the child is school-aged. Minor disabilities like learning problems, poor coordination, or short attention span may be the result of premature birth, but can be overcome with early intervention. The risks of serious long-term complications depend on many factors, including how premature the infant was at birth, weight at birth, and the presence or absence of breathing problems. Gender is a definite factor: a Swedish study published in 2003 found that boys are at greater risk of death or serious long-term consequences of prematurity than girls; for example, 60% of boys born at 24 weeeks' gestation die, compared to 38% mortality for girls. The development of infection or the presence of a birth defect can also affect long-term prognosis. Infections in premature and very low birth weight infants are a risk factor for later disorders of the nervous system; a study done at Johns Hopkins reported that 77 out of a group of 213 premature infants developed neurologic disorders. Severe disabilities like brain damage, blindness, and chronic lung problems are possible and may require ongoing care."
With the improvements in medical technology the odds of there being long term damage is alot less than it was years ago. And as improvements continue the odds of a healthy baby will continue to increase.
The odds are still too great to undertake such a venture by CHOICE.
Chicago Tribune news | Registration
"The chance of survival is not the only thing physicians and parents factor into decisions. The child's likely future quality of life, which no one can accurately predict, also looms large.
National follow-up studies of infants born at 23 or 24 weeks show that roughly a third are blind, deaf or living with cerebral palsy. A quarter are mentally retarded. Half have significant developmental problems."
And as pointed out a baby can survive after only 21 weeks.
VERY FEW. And what will its quality of life be?
And in the 1960s 30 weeks was typically the cut off point of survival.
So as I pointed out before as technology improves the survival rates will continue to improve.
Some doctors think there is a "wall" in gestational age that inprovement in technology cannot breach. It is commonly accepted procedure to offer premies before 22 weeks comfort care only.
