`Partial-birth abortion' ban goes to high court [Archive]

View Full Version : `Partial-birth abortion' ban goes to high court

Professor

11-06-2006, 02:15 PM

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0611060211nov06,1,5263533.story?coll=chi-news-hed

`Partial-birth abortion' ban goes to high court
Justices to hear 2 challenges to '03 law

By Judy Peres
Tribune staff reporter

November 6, 2006

Carrie and Corey Elliott were picking out strollers when they found out the child they had tried so long to conceive had tetrasomy 22, a rare genetic abnormality. At 21 weeks of pregnancy, sonograms showed the unborn baby they had decided to call Emma was beginning to suffer kidney failure.

"I don't believe she was ever going to come home," said Carrie Elliott, 41. "It was just a question of, do we make it fast or drag it out and make her suffer? So we decided to terminate."

The procedure doctors chose to end Elliott's pregnancy with the least risk to her health may well have been one of those Congress has banned, calling it a "partial-birth abortion."

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear arguments in two cases challenging the 2003 ban, which has been on hold, and likely will rule on them next spring. The outcome is seen as a major test of the political effort to restrict abortion, as well as a test of whether legislators or judges should have the last word.

Since 1973, when Roe vs. Wade was decided, the court has consistently held that women have a constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. Although states may regulate abortion and even outlaw it when the fetus can survive outside the womb, the court has insisted that any ban contain an exception for cases in which the life or health of the pregnant woman is at risk.

New faces on court

In 2000, the court struck down a Nebraska ban on what legislators there called partial-birth abortion, in part because it had no exception for protecting the woman's health (although it did have one for cases in which her life was in danger). Then-Justice Sandra Day O'Connor joined the four liberals on the bench to create a 5-4 majority.

But O'Connor is now gone, and there are two new court members: Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel Alito.

Legal observers expect that Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy will vote to uphold the ban. And Alito's writings indicate he would overturn Roe vs. Wade.

"The chief justice is the biggest question mark, because his views aren't particularly on record," said Andrew Koppelman, a professor of law and political science at Northwestern University.

Nevertheless, he said, "if I had to bet, I'd bet on the court upholding the ban on partial-birth abortion, just because of what we know about where Roberts' general sympathies lie."

If the court upholds the ban, it would be deferring to Congress in an area where the legislature flatly disagreed with judicial rulings.

To get around the Supreme Court's requirement that any ban on abortion contain an exception to preserve the health of the mother, one federal appellate court wrote, Congress "found and declared" that "partial-birth abortion . . . is a gruesome and inhumane procedure that is never medically necessary."

"This is really about more than just abortion," said Priscilla Smith of the Center for Reproductive Rights, lead counsel in the case, Gonzales vs. Carhart. "It's about whether the court will continue its role in our three-branch system of government -- being the interpreter of the Constitution and the protector of individual liberties.

"If Congress can make `findings' that say, `We disagree with the court,' then the court loses its role entirely and the legislature can decide which rights you're allowed to have," Smith said.

The high court's other objection to the Nebraska ban was that it was worded so broadly that it applied to the vast majority of abortions performed after the first trimester. Opponents say the federal ban has the same fatal flaw because "partial-birth abortion" is not a medical term.

The federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 says a physician who "knowingly performs a partial-birth abortion and thereby kills a human fetus" may be imprisoned for up to 2 years. It defines partial-birth abortion as a procedure in which the clinician "delivers a living fetus" until part of the fetus is "outside the body of the mother" and then "performs the overt act . . . that kills the partially delivered living fetus."

Anti-abortion obstetricians say the ban refers to D&X (dilation and extraction) or intact D&E (dilation and evacuation). Dr. LeRoy Sprang, an Evanston obstetrician and a clinical professor of obstetrics at Northwestern, has said D&X entails risks of its own, is inhumane and is never medically necessary because other procedures are available.

But doctors who perform abortions say D&X is merely a variant of D&E, and virtually any D&E can run afoul of the law. They say the only way to be sure of not tripping the ban is to kill the fetus before removing it or to cut it out of the woman's body, both of which are riskier to the woman.

Roger Evans, legal director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, a respondent in the second case, said the law is a "hoax."

"It's not some rare, aberrant, `late-term,' barbaric procedure that the act is banning," he said. "It's banning a wide range of second-trimester abortions that proceed according to methods deemed safest for the patient."

Dr. Cassing Hammond, an obstetrician at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, said that if the ban goes into effect "it will put the health and lives of many of my patients at risk. I won't be able to do the procedure in the way that's safest for the patient. And I really don't want politicians in my operating room, telling me how I'm supposed to help my patients."

Carrie Elliott was not a candidate for a first-trimester abortion. When she was in her third month, a test indicated a possible problem. But doctors couldn't be certain.

"Both my husband and I wanted the baby very much," she wrote in a brief filed with the Supreme Court, "and neither one of us was willing to terminate on a `maybe.'" By the time they knew for sure the fetus would be severely malformed and likely would not survive, she was in her fifth month.

Elliott, who lives in the Southwest U.S., said the only procedure available to her was a D&E, which doctors assured her would be a "painless passing" for the fetus and the safest thing for her.

Family in mourning

The Elliotts are still mourning the loss of the baby who would have been 5 months old now. And they would rather grieve privately, they said, but both felt it was important to speak out.

If the procedure she underwent were banned, said Carrie Elliott, "I would have been forced to carry to term, or make a rushed decision at 12 weeks. But having the extra time, we could make a reasoned decision based on more facts. And it could have gone the other way--it could have turned out she was OK."

----------

jperes@tribune.com
Copyright Â© 2006, Chicago Tribune

lily

11-07-2006, 04:06 AM

Not to keep repeating myself, but Roe vs Wade was decided in the 70's on 50's medicine/science. It does need tweaking. Anyone that thinks a woman who will carry a baby for six months and then on a whim decide she doesn't want to have it, well.......has never carried a baby. Women who need this procedure done, think hard and long......and they don't ever forget it.

Those that will now come and say, they poke the babies brains out, should be looking for a more humane way to have this prcedure done, if they are so concerned that's the only way it is done.

Since 1973, when Roe vs. Wade was decided, the court has consistently held that women have a constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. Although states may regulate abortion and even outlaw it when the fetus can survive outside the womb, the court has insisted that any ban contain an exception for cases in which the life or health of the pregnant woman is at risk.

This is a state matter.......not a federal matter.

Elrathin

11-07-2006, 11:21 AM

This is a state matter.......not a federal matter.

In this I agree. I don't think ALL aobrtions should be illegal, but I think the states should have the right to individually decide whether they want to make abortion illegal or not.

Jaaaman

11-07-2006, 01:16 PM

I am anti-abortion because I feel this act is murder, life is not a mistake. Abortion and physician assisted suicide cheapen human life. Doctors are sworn to protect life, not end it... even a life. In the womb, the baby reacts to environmental stimuli and shares many of the physiological features that define human life. Furthermore, most mothers who had an abortion suffer a great deal of mental and/or physical anguish due to their "choice". Abortion is a "choice" that very few people can feel good about. Teach children to respect sex and the responsibility that accompanies it. It makes better sense to prevent teen and unplanned pregnancies by not taking part in actions that cause pregnancy.

lily

11-08-2006, 01:08 AM

cs0564

11-08-2006, 09:18 AM

By your post, Jaaa.....you seem to think it's only teens that are getting abortions.

I'd like to know your opinion on a mother, as in the article choosing to end the life of her very wanted child, in order to save it from only suffering once it was born. Is a minute's worth of suffering, (suffering I might add, could be painless, if laws were changed) worse than hours, days, months or even years of suffering for a child?

You see, it's not your decision to make, it's the mother's. You , nor anyone else has the right to take that hard fought right away from anyone.

On a final note....if you don't think "assisted suicide" is done every day, in every hospital around the world by doctors giving just 1cc more of morphine to a dying patient, to end his suffering, then I don't think you've ever been at a loved one's death bed.

The baby of a PBA is delivered breached so that the legs and hands come out first. Once the shoulders are out and the majority of the head are still in ensuring the baby cannot take a breath outside the womb the doctor places an instrument in the soft portion at the back base of the neck and inserts a device to suction out the brain matter to kill the Central Nervous System. Once the baby is dead the doctor delivers the baby and discards it's body. Never has there been a documented case showing a necessity to save the mothers life. I realize there are some reasons for an abortion and I personally have no issue with preocess like the morning after pill, I have a real issue with baby's that are perfectly healthy that are being killed in the 23 week, 29th, 32nd, 36th. Can anyone defend that?

Here are a couple of links you should look at:

http://www.drtiller.com/elect.html
http://www.dr-tiller.com/

lily

11-08-2006, 11:38 PM

The baby of a PBA is delivered breached so that the legs and hands come out first.Â*Â*Once the shoulders are out and the majority of the head are still in ensuring the baby cannot take a breath outside the womb the doctor places an instrument in the soft portion at the back base of the neck and inserts a device to suction out the brain matter to kill the Central Nervous System.Â*Â*Once the baby is dead the doctor delivers the baby and discards it's body.

Cs.....the baby is in that position, because it's not ready to be born. Nobody puts it in that position. I think I've stated my point well enough about changing the law or the procedure so this won't happen, so I won't repeat myself.

Â* Never has there been a documented case showing a necessity to save the mothers life.

Never is such a strong word. There are medical conditions where this is necessary. If you wish to continue this discussion, I will find proof, although with patient doctor confidentuality, I'm sure it would be time consuming and I don't want to wast my time, if you're really not interested in dicussing this.

I realize there are some reasons for an abortion and I personally have no issue with preocess like the morning after pill,

As I rarely get into abortion debates, because frankly no one is going to change their mind, I don't expect you to know my stance on this. The morining after pill is a wonderful medical tool....... women don't know the morning after sex if they are pregnant or not. Medicically (sp) it's good for what it's worth. Rape, unprotected sex, ect. It has nothing to do with the discussion of late term abortions, though.

I have a real issue with baby's that are perfectly healthy that are being killed in the 23 week, 29th, 32nd, 36th.Â*Â*Can anyone defend that?

I've made the (sane) post claiming that women don't have late term abortions unless there is something wrong. This is your claim, so I'm going to have to ask for proof that they are using it as a method of birth control. I've also stated my position on Roe vs. Wade and modern scientific discoveries.

Here are a couple of links you should look at:

http://www.drtiller.com/elect.html
http://www.dr-tiller.com/

I'm not sure what an ad for late term abortions in Kansas or a hate piece on an abortion doctor is proving.

cs0564

11-09-2006, 12:32 AM

Cs.....the baby is in that position, because it's not ready to be born. Nobody puts it in that position. I think I've stated my point well enough about changing the law or the procedure so this won't happen, so I won't repeat myself.

Babies are not normally born breached. Aborted baby's are not considered "Born". The Doctor actually has to ensure the baby is in that position to ensure that it is not "born" (aka breating). At 36 weeks the child turns so that it can be delivered normally.

Never is such a strong word. There are medical conditions where this is necessary. If you wish to continue this discussion, I will find proof, although with patient doctor confidentuality, I'm sure it would be time consuming and I don't want to wast my time, if you're really not interested in dicussing this. Never may be too strong later, but right now there are not any documented times where the mother's life was endangered during a PBA. Actually, if the mother was in danger a simple C section would save both. Undestand I have said I understand there are "Some" instances where abortion in the first trimester would be ok. Rape, incest, child has terminal issue, ect...... Too many poeple willing to adopt to allow "carte blanche", willy nilly abortions. Personally I am glad I wasn't aborted :)!

As I rarely get into abortion debates, because frankly no one is going to change their mind, I don't expect you to know my stance on this. The morining after pill is a wonderful medical tool....... women don't know the morning after sex if they are pregnant or not. Medicically (sp) it's good for what it's worth. Rape, unprotected sex, ect. It has nothing to do with the discussion of late term abortions, though.[quote]

Just trying to show that I am not so "right" that I cannot see that certain times a need for an abortion is necessary. Many "right wingers" see no reason for it in any manner. Never should ever be used for anything, right:).

[quote=lily]
I've made the (sane) post claiming that women don't have late term abortions unless there is something wrong. This is your claim, so I'm going to have to ask for proof that they are using it as a method of birth control. I've also stated my position on Roe vs. Wade and modern scientific discoveries.[quote]

1.5 million abortions per year should do that! There are 73.5 million children under the age of 18.

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2005/09/06/index.html
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/reasonsabortions.html
http://www.euthanasia.com/usstat.html
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html
http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/53NumberofChildren.cfm
http://www.californiaprolife.org/abortion/whyabot.htm

[quote=lily]
I'm not sure what an ad for late term abortions in Kansas or a hate piece on an abortion doctor is proving.

Well the idea that "middle America" is thriving on late term PBA's. I don't like "hate" sites either, but it has some iterseting information on it. Please do not get me wrong. I do not condone abortion center bombings or killing abortion doctors or any of that extreme nonsense. I believe in the course of the law. I will try to shift as much opinion as I can with facts and hope the law is changed some day to a more "Common Sense" piece of legislation.

lily

11-09-2006, 02:02 AM

Babies are not normally born breached. Aborted baby's are not considered "Born". The Doctor actually has to ensure the baby is in that position to ensure that it is not "born" (aka breating). At 36 weeks the child turns so that it can be delivered normally.

You see, now you've changed your argument. It went from 23 week, 29th, 32nd, 36th. If you find me proof that a doctor performed an abortion on a woman in her 36th week of pregnancy, for any other reason than the baby was stillborn, unable to live out side the womb, sever abnormacies or the mother's health......then I will agree with you. Before the 36th week, the baby's head is not in the birth canal.

You are making the argument, or so it seems that the doctor turns the baby so it is breach.

Actually, if the mother was in danger a simple C section would save both.

Off the top of my head I can think of a few. Internal injuries. Extremely high blood pressure, which isn't uncommon in pregnant women, or any other condition which would not allow the mother to be put under anestisia....
Â*Â*

Personally I am glad I wasn't aborted :)!

.....and I'm old enough to know what life was, before the choice of abortion was given to women.

1.5 million abortions per year should do that! There are 73.5 million children under the age of 18.

http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2005/09/06/index.html
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/reasonsabortions.html
http://www.euthanasia.com/usstat.html
http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats.html
http://www.childtrendsdatabank.org/indicators/53NumberofChildren.cfm
http://www.californiaprolife.org/abortion/whyabot.htm

....again, nothing to do with what we are discussing......late term abortions.

Well the idea that "middle America" is thriving on late term PBA's.

Nothing you have shown me so far, has anything to do with late term abortions. Abortions, yes........late term........no.

lily

11-09-2006, 03:50 PM

Professor

11-09-2006, 03:57 PM

I am anti-abortion because I feel this act is murder, life is not a mistake. Abortion and physician assisted suicide cheapen human life.

What about suicide? I don't think it cheapens human life. I've lost two friends to suicide. In both cases, they did it on their own. One was in prison facing a life sentence, so he hung himself with his belt. The other had suffered a long illness and killed herself when given one month to live.

Neither of these cheapens life, they both wanted to die. Both faced dead ends in their lives, a painful uncertain death and prison. So they took control of their own destinies

It's the same way with doctor assisted suicide. The patient can control so little and should be allowed that small choice over his or her life.

Teach children to respect sex and the responsibility that accompanies it. It makes better sense to prevent teen and unplanned pregnancies by not taking part in actions that cause pregnancy.

I agree with this. Of course, then we run into the problem that in public school sex-ed classes absence is taught is the primary method of birth control.

Onto Biblical matters...

Where in the bible does it say that abortion is forbidden? None of these seem to me to be talking about abortion, just about children and murder. Someone else seems to have made the connection.

Gen. 1:27.... "God created man in his own image."

Ps. 127:3.... "Behold, children are a gift of the Lord."

Ps. 139:13-16.... "For Thou didst form my inward parts, Thou didst weave me in my mother's womb. I will give thanks to Thee for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; my frame was not hidden from Thee, when I was made in secret. Thine eyes have seen my unformed substance; and in Thy book they were all written, the days that were ordained for me, when as yet there was not one of them."

Job 31:15.... "Did not he who made me in the womb make him and the same one fashion us in the womb?"

Gal. 1:15.... "And when he who had set me apart, even from my mother's womb, and called me through his grace."

Jer. 1:5.... "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you."

Prov. 17:6.... "Grandchildren are the crown of old men."

Mat. 10: 14.... "Permit the children to come to me; do not hinder them; for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these."

Mat. 10:15.... "Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the Kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it at all. And he took them in his arms and began blessing them, laying his hands upon them.

Ps. 113:9.... "He makes the barren woman abide in the house, as a joyful mother of children. Praise the Lord."

Mic. 6:7.... "Shall I give my first born for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?"
Prov. 15:3.... "The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good."

Isa. 5:20.... "Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil, who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness."

Isa. 1:15-17.... "I will hide my eyes from you, yes even though you multiply prayers, I will not listen. Your hands are covered with blood. Wash yourselves, make yourselves clean. Remove the evil of your deeds from my sight. Cease to do evil. Learn to do good. Seek justice, reprove the ruthless. Defend the orphan."

Isa. 1:26.... "Men I will restore your judges as the first, and your counselors as at the beginning. After that you will be called the city of righteousness, a faithful city."

Prov. 24:11-12.... "Deliver those who are being taken away to death, and those who are staggering to slaughter, O hold them back. If you say, 'See, we did not know this,' does he not consider it who weighs the hearts? And does he not know it who keeps your soul? And will he not render to man according to his work."

2 Chr. 7:14.... "If my people who are called by my name humble themselves and pray, and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin, and heal their land."

1 Jn. 1:9.... "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous and will forgive us our sins."

Professor

11-09-2006, 04:02 PM

I found this on an abortion site, it details different kinds of abortions and what happens. I tried to find something to post that wasn't slanted one way or another, but it was very hard, everything seems to have an opinion.

Source:http://www.fwhc.org/abortion/ab-procedures.htm

During an abortion, the pregnancy is removed from the uterus. The method depends upon the stage of pregnancy and the woman's preference. During the appointment, clinic staff will explain the procedure, risks, medications, options, and what to expect after the abortion.

Note: weeks are measured since last menstrual period (LMP).

The Abortion Pill, (also known as Mifepristone, M&M, Non-surgical Abortion or Medical Abortion):
Mifepristone abortion is an option up to 8 weeks LMP. Prescription Mifepristone is taken in pill form at the clinic. It causes the end of the pregnancy. Then 24-72 hours later, the woman uses Misoprostol causing the uterus to contract and expel the tissue. A follow-up appointment is required to make sure the abortion is complete. Occasionally more than one follow-up appointment is necessary. To use this method, women must live within 2 hours of a hospital. Some women prefer The Abortion Pill because the process feels more natural and private; they can decide where they are when they go through the experience, such as staying home for the weekend. Side effects of the second medication include cramping, bleeding, diarrhea, nausea, etc.

Vacuum Aspiration:
In the first trimester, usually 6 to 13 weeks, vacuum aspiration is the procedure used to empty the uterus. This traditional first trimester abortion involves three main steps: (1) an injection to numb the cervix, (2) insertion of a soft flexible tube through the cervix into the uterus, (3) suction created by an aspirating machine to remove the uterine contents. It takes less than five minutes to complete.

IPAS Syringe - Early Abortion with Manual Vacuum Aspiration (MVA):
As soon as the pregnancy can be detected by ultrasound (typically 4-5 weeks), an abortion can be performed using a manual aspiration device called the IPAS Syringe. Similar to the suction aspiration procedure, the IPAS system consists of thin flexible tubing, but instead of using a machine to create suction, the suction is created by a handheld syringe. The procedure usually takes less than 5 minutes to complete. Aftercare is the same as with suction aspiration. Availability of this procedure is based upon doctor's discretion. Abortion by syringe is sometimes referred to as the quiet abortion.

D & E (Dilate and Evacuate):
From 13 to 24 weeks, Feminist Women's Health Center uses the Dilation and Evacuation (D&E) procedure. Appointments are made for 2-3 consecutive days. On the first day, an ultrasound (sonogram) is performed to determine the size of the fetus. Then, the abortion procedure is begun by numbing the cervix with injections and inserting dilators into the cervix. Overnight these dilators gently expand, opening the entrance to the uterus. The next day, the cervix is again numbed, the dilators are removed, and the doctor uses special instruments to evacuate the uterus removing the pregnancy. The final step is suction using the aspirating machine. In more advanced pregnancies, additional dilators are inserted on the second day and the fetus is removed on the third day. The medical procedure lasts about 10-15 minutes.

General Anesthesia:
In Renton, general anesthesia is an option for either first and second trimester procedures. With general anesthesia, the woman is unconscious during the procedure (5 to 15 minutes) and afterward she has no memory of the events. The type of anesthesia we use is administered intravenously, through an IV in the arm, by a licensed nurse anesthetist. It is fast-acting and consciousness quickly returns when the procedure is over. Afterward, the client relaxes for 1-2 hours before she can leave the clinic and she must not drive afterward. There is an extra charge for general anesthesia and not all insurance plans cover it.

Local Anesthesia / Conscious Sedation / Comfort Sleep
Several anesthesia options are available to help make the abortion as comfortable as possible.

cs0564

11-09-2006, 11:58 PM

Cs......while watching the last half of the O'Reilly factor, I noticed that the doctor you were talking about was a bigger deal than I was giving you credit for. I did not know that some of his abortions were being brought in front of the Supreme Court as, for the lack of a better word, evidence. When I get a chance, be it today or not until Monday, I will read yesterday's news on this and get back to you, if you still wish to discuss it.

Lily this is the reason why I like discussing things with you. I appreciate A. The fact you watch O'reilly even though you may not agree with much that he says. B. Your willing to at least look further into an issue and have an open mind.

lily

11-10-2006, 03:11 AM

Lily this is the reason why I like discussing things with you.

You should have mentioned the Supreme Court case in one of your posts.....I had no idea who Tiller was, or that they were using his case as some sort of example or evidence.

My brain is mush tonight. So without any thing to back up what I'm saying, it sounds like the Tiller guy was giving late term abortions, under the reason of depression of the mother, while having another doctor, which is always the same doctor's name sign off on them. Am I right so far?

If so, this is a criminal case and one that from what it sounds like not too common and they are trying to prosecute him on this...if they find him.

As I said, I haven't read the artcile where the Supreme Court heard testimony on this. I know I saw something in the crawl, but I haven't had time to either find it or read it tonight.........tomorrow, though if your still interested......but I must warn you that I don't think it's right that the Supreme Court make a decision on one person's wrong doing. I've also said that abortion should be left to the states to decide. If a state doens't want partial birth abortions, then the citizens of the state should vote on it.......it's been tried, but I don't think without the provision for the life of the mother.

DHard3006

11-10-2006, 11:40 PM

I am all for partial birth abortions. Simply because the majority of the people ding this are leftist aka progressives. This is one way to thin the leftist aka progressives out. Allowing the leftist aka progressives to kill of their own kind. What a sorry state that is!

Labrocca

11-11-2006, 06:11 PM

Oh jeez...I had to simply delete your silly comments. Please continue with the debate and refrain from personal attacks please.

DHard3006

11-13-2006, 09:26 PM

The leftist aka progressive said he would like to perform an abortion now. Since I am not in the womb that would not be an abortion but murder. That is not called a joke, that is called a death threat.

Elrathin

11-13-2006, 09:31 PM

NortheastCynic

11-13-2006, 09:33 PM

Wow, I find myself on the same side as DHard, who knew?Â*Â*My view on abortion is that if a baby is developed enough at the time of abortion that it could live independent of its mother, then that abortion is essentially killing a living baby.Â*Â*Partial birth abortion, by my parameters is a denial of the baby's natural right to life.Â*Â*Partial birth abortions should be extremely illegal, in my humble opinion.

-NC

cs0564

11-13-2006, 10:17 PM

NortheastCynic

11-13-2006, 10:48 PM

Amen CS, it's nice to be on the same side.

-NC