• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Roe v Wade is on deck

Elixir, I'm bowing out of this discussion. You hold an extremist view, and you're not going to bully me into adopting it. I've tried to be civil and to have a reasonable discussion, I've even done your research on harm/benefit for you as opposed to just accepting your empty assertion. I've provided logic and reason and evidence, I've shown that your view is a minority view that most people disagree with. My view is a reasonably balanced and rational position, one which is shared by most people, and which is more generous than any policy in place in any other developed nation.

You're not going to be talked out of your extremity. You don't even recognize it as being extreme. So there's no point.
 
Emily Lake said:
But let's talk numbers. Let's do it. I provided at least 2 out of 28 women who were willing to be surveyed about their third trimester abortions had one because they hadn't known they were pregnant. I feel empathy for being in that situation when you didn't plan to be a mom, but the fact remains that there was no identified or suspected risk to the mother's health or life, and there was no known or suspected deformity or deleterious condition of the fetus. In short, it was a healthy fetus, in a healthy mother. This is the scenario that you have dismissed as being virtually nonexistent to an extent that you assert that it does less harm than the number of women who die because they were denied an abortion.

That's your argument.

With the understanding that the range of uncertainty is high, let's stipulate that it's representative of the percent of third trimester abortions that are given to healthy mothers with healthy fetuses. That makes it 2/28 healthy 3rd Trimester abortions, or 7.14%.

The abortion rate in 2022 was 15.4 per 1000 women age 15-44 years old. That's 1.54% of the females in the US. In 2022, there were approximately 66 million women aged 15-44 in the US. That means that there were 1,016,400 abortions in 2022, but let's call it 1 million for simplicity. 7% of abortions occur after 13 weeks, 1% after 20 weeks. The number after 26 weeks would be lower, let's say 0.1% - that would be 1,000 third trimester abortions in 2022. So of those, 7.14% are for healthy babies and healthy mothers - that's 71.4 total cases.
Click to expand...
That math is interesting... but my problem is this. You have spent a mind-blowing number of posts about a situation that accounts for 0.07% of all abortions, according to your... analysis. IE, for every 1,428 abortion, 1 is about what you've been railing on about for months.

You unequivocally support the right the 1,427 women to abortion... but won't stop railing about that 1 other woman? Thou protests too bloody much.
 
Last edited:
Emily Lake said:
Elixir, I'm bowing out of this discussion.
Click to expand...
Probably best for you.
Emily Lake said:
You hold an extremist view, and you're not going to bully me into adopting it.
Click to expand...
I consider my “view” more objective than extreme. I also consider it irrelevant to the discussion you want to leave. I don’t care about your “view” either - you are perfectly entitled to it.
I do care about facts, and about human suffering. I bring them here for consideration, because ignoring either, results in cruelty and suffering, regardless of intent.
 
Emily Lake said:
ZiprHead said:
Emily Lake said:
Loren Pechtel said:
Emily Lake said:
I know it doesn't work like that. That's my point. Some posters have made an appeal to medical standards of practice and ethical guidelines, with the assumption that such ethical principles provide meaningful guidance on when it's appropriate and ethical for a doctor to perform a third trimester abortion and when it's not. The reality is that the ethical principles that are published do not provide any guidance on abortions at all - not a single word. Furthermore, the ethical principles vary from organization to organization - there is no single organization whose ethical principles apply to all doctors - only about 15% of the practicing doctors in the US are part of AMA at all for example.

And beyond that, there are no comprehensive standards of practice for doctors. They don't exist. There is no handbook - thus my point that some posters are laboring under the FALSE IMPRESSION that there are well-defined standards of practice. There are none. None exist with regards to abortion.
Click to expand...
What you are refusing to consider is that the standards of practice change over time as things are learned. Thus the details should not be codified!

The standards are you do not deviate too far from standard practice lest you get your license yanked.
Click to expand...
What you are missing is that NO STANDARD OF PRACTICE EXISTS related to abortion.
Click to expand...
And... ? So what?
Click to expand...
So it's a terminally flawed argument for people to insist that we should rely on doctors being held to standards of practice as presented under their ethical guidelines when no such SoPs exist.

No license will be yanked if there is no standard of practice.
Click to expand...
Per the Google:

Standards of practice for abortion care emphasize providing safe, respectful, and informed medical services. This includes ensuring a patient's right to make an informed decision, respecting their autonomy, and providing accurate information about the procedure and potential complications. Standards also address non-discrimination, confidentiality, and the need for adequate referral mechanisms.

Here's a more detailed look at key aspects:

1. Informed Consent and Decision-Making:
  • Patients should be fully informed about the risks, benefits, and alternatives to abortion, including the potential for future fertility.

  • Their decision must be voluntary and not coerced.

  • Providers should be sensitive to the patient's emotional and psychological needs.
2. Respect and Dignity:
  • Abortion care should be provided with respect, dignity, and without stigma or judgment.

  • Patients are entitled to privacy and confidentiality.

  • Providers should not discriminate based on factors like race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or gender identity.
3. Safe and Effective Procedures:
  • Providers must follow established guidelines and best practices for abortion procedures.

  • This includes using appropriate equipment, maintaining a sterile environment, and providing proper aftercare.

  • Access to pain management options is crucial.
4. Non-Discrimination:
  • Providers should not discriminate against patients based on any protected characteristic.
  • This includes making abortion care accessible to economically disadvantaged individuals.
5. Confidentiality and Privacy:
  • Patient information should be protected and kept confidential.

  • Patients should be informed about the potential for disclosure of information to third parties, such as insurance companies.
6. Referral Mechanisms:
  • Providers should have adequate referral mechanisms in place for patients who may need additional support or services.

  • This could include referrals to social workers, counselors, or other healthcare professionals.
7. Post-Abortion Care:
  • Patients should receive adequate aftercare instructions, including information on potential complications and how to seek timely medical attention.
  • Access to contraception and family planning services is also important.
8. Ethical Considerations:
  • Providers should be aware of the ethical implications of abortion care, such as the potential for conflicting beliefs or values.
  • They should strive to provide care that is both ethically sound and clinically effective.
Click to expand...
Your strawman just acquired an asbestos suit.
 
This seems so awful, it is hard to believe it is true. link

I actually did a triple check to confirm that a hospital that at first fucked up on providing care that might have saved the woman's life (unrelated to her pregnancy which was nine weeks) and was declared brain dead three months ago... is still being kept alive to get the fetus to term. It just sounds so unbelievable, but it is true and she needs to be kept alive for three more months.
article said:
A pregnant woman in Georgia who was declared brain dead after a medical emergency has been on life support for three months to let the fetus grow enough to be delivered, a move her family says a hospital told them was required under the state’s strict anti-abortion law.

With her due date still more than three months away, it could be one of the longest such pregnancies. Her family is upset that Georgia’s law that restricts abortion once cardiac activity is detected doesn’t allow relatives to have a say in whether a pregnant woman is kept on life support.

Georgia’s so-called “heartbeat law” is among the restrictive abortion statutes that have been put in place in many conservative states since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade three years ago.
Click to expand...
This is utterly horrific!
 
www.theguardian.com

A dystopian surveillance fear has become reality in Texas | Arwa Mahdawi

Law enforcement used license-plate readers in several states to search for a woman who had an abortion
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Back in 2022, a few months after Roe v Wade was overturned, the Guardian published a piece on ALPRs warning that “an expanding web of license plate readers could be ‘weaponized’ against abortion”. It focused on a company called Flock, one of the big players in this space, which promises a “holistic solution to crime”.

Flock’s technology could be used to “criminalize people seeking reproductive health and further erode people’s ability to move about their daily lives free from being tracked and traced”, one expert told the Guardian at the time. Another civil rights expert warned that Flock, which has stated that it is happy to provide technology to help enact whatever laws have been passed, “illustrates how surveillance isn’t actually about benefiting society or protecting people – it’s about enforcing the political goals of those in power”.

Unfortunately, all these experts have been proved right. This week 404 Media reported that a Texas police officer used Flock to perform a nationwide search of more than 83,000 ALPR cameras while looking for a woman who had had an abortion. Abortion is almost entirely illegal in Texas but law enforcement reportedly looked at cameras in states such as Washington and Illinois, where abortion is legal.

Anti-abortion voices love to argue that they’re not trying to control women, they’re trying to protect women. Funnily enough this same talking point came up in this case. Sheriff Adam King of Johnson county, Texas, told 404 Media that the woman had self-administered the abortion “and her family was worried that she was going to bleed to death, and we were trying to find her to get her to a hospital.” He added: “We weren’t trying to block her from leaving the state or whatever to get an abortion. It was about her safety.”
Click to expand...
 
Riiiight, because if she was unsafe in Washington or Illinois, the paramedics or police of Johnson county Texas could ride to the rescue. Yeehaa!!!!
 
Trump administration revokes guidance requiring hospitals to provide emergency abortions

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration announced on Tuesday that it would revoke guidance to the nation’s hospitals that directed them to provide emergency abortions for women when they are necessary to stabilize their medical condition.

That guidance was issued to hospitals in 2022, weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court upended national abortion rights in the U.S. It was an effort by the Biden administration to preserve abortion access for extreme cases in which women were experiencing medical emergencies and needed an abortion to prevent organ loss or severe hemorrhaging, among other serious complications.

The Biden administration had argued that hospitals — including ones in states with near-total bans — needed to provide emergency abortions under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. That law requires emergency rooms that receive Medicare dollars to provide an exam and stabilizing treatment for all patients. Nearly all emergency rooms in the U.S. rely on Medicare funds.

The Trump administration announced on Tuesday that it would no longer enforce that policy.

The move prompted concerns from some doctors and abortion rights advocates that women will not get emergency abortions in states with strict bans.
Click to expand...
Another example of the Republican die quickly, peasants campaign.
 
That story pairs with this too well.
article said:
A Texas hospital that repeatedly sent a woman who was bleeding and in pain home without ending her nonviable, life-threatening pregnancy violated the law, according to a newly released federal investigation.

The government's findings, which have not been previously reported, were a small victory for 36-year-old Kyleigh Thurman, who ultimately lost part of her reproductive system after being discharged without any help from her hometown emergency room for her dangerous ectopic pregnancy.

....

Emergency room staff observed that Thurman's hormone levels had dropped, a pregnancy was not visible in her uterus and a structure was blocking her fallopian tube — all telltale signs of an ectopic pregnancy, when a fetus implants outside of the uterus and has no room to grow. If left untreated, ectopic pregnancies can rupture, causing organ damage, hemorrhage or even death.

Thurman, however, was sent home and given a pamphlet on miscarriage for her first pregnancy. She returned three days later, still bleeding, and was given an injected drug intended to end the pregnancy, but it was too late. Days later, she showed up again at the emergency room, bleeding out because the fertilized egg growing on Thurman’s fallopian tube ruptured it. She underwent an emergency surgery that removed part of her reproductive system.
Click to expand...
So, it ends up costing most financially, cost this woman part of her body (as well as the pain, presumable more invasive surgery, and indescribable frustration), and puts people in legal peril.

How is this winning?
 
My mom would have died if it weren't for a surgical removal of an ectopic baby. One that she and Dad very much wanted, making their plans for a big flock of kids that much more of a struggle.
Tom
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
ZiprHead said:


Why are these people so friggin' stupid?
Click to expand...

Does the article measure her accusation or does the WSJ just do the WSJ thing?
Click to expand...

It's paywalled at the WSJ but here's an archive.

Who is to blame?​

Cammack doesn’t fault the Florida law for her experience. Instead, she accuses the left of scaring medical professionals with messaging that stressed that they could face criminal charges for violating the law. She said she feels those efforts gave medical staff reason to fear giving drugs even under legal circumstances.

“It was absolute fearmongering at its worst,” she said. She also knows that abortion-rights advocates might see the opposite—that the Republican-led restriction caused the confusion. “There will be some comments like, ‘Well, thank God we have abortion services,’ even though what I went through wasn’t an abortion,” she said. Cammack declined to name the hospital where she received care.

Abortion-rights advocates say the law created the problems. While Florida regulators say ectopic pregnancies aren’t abortions and are exempt from restrictions, the law doesn’t define ectopic pregnancy, and it isn’t always easy for doctors to tell where an embryo has implanted, said Molly Duane, a senior attorney at the Center for Reproductive Rights.

Asked whether abortion-rights groups contributed to confusion, Duane said Florida regulators had stressed how seriously they planned to enforce the ban. She said blaming medical workers echoes the “playbook of antiabortion extremists that for decades have been blaming and villainizing doctors.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom