A recent article published in the Journal of the American Medicine Association (JAMA) that claimed a fetus "probably" feels no pain, is receiving a lot of backlash. It seems that editors were unaware of apparent conflicts of interest with the authors.
"Critics said the article in Wednesday's JAMA was a politically motivated attack on proposed federal legislation that would require doctors to provide fetal pain information to women seeking abortions when fetuses are at least 20 weeks, and to offer women fetal anesthesia at that stage of the pregnancy. A handful of states have enacted similar measures."
One of the authors is a California abortion doctor and another was a NARAL employee. The Editor in Chief of the publication, Dr. Catherine DeAngelis, said she would have "published the medical student's NARAL connection as a potential conflict of interest had she known about it in advance, but that not mentioning it does not mean that the article or journal are biased."
My two cents is:
I hope to God they are right and the baby doesn't experience pain (I find that a bit hard to believe since PETA has repeatedly said that lobsters and shrimp feel pain and a baby's nervous system is much more intricate) ...but why take the chance? If fetal anesthesia is available...spend the extra money and administer it...it's the LEAST you can do! (source)
*Thanks to Liz for this article*
Thankfully, we are making progress on parental consent and the barbaric practice of late term abortion.