SD to enforce law that abortion “ends a human life”
From today’s Rapid City Journal:
South Dakota will begin as early as Friday to enforce a 2005 law that requires doctors to tell women seeking abortions that the procedure ends a human life….
An order issued by a federal judge means that as of Friday, there will no longer be any court order preventing the state from enforcing the law….
Planned Parenthood, which operates SD’s only abortion clinic in Sioux Falls, will comply with the law….
“We will do what the law says, but clearly the law is extreme and flawed and wrong,”
[spokesperson Kathi] Di Nicola said.
PP believes the courts will eventually strike down the SD law….
The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal last month overruled a lower court order that had temporarily prevented the state from enforcing the law. The appeals court said SD could begin enforcing the law passed by the 2005 SD Legislature….
The appeals court’s decision sent the case back to U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier… for proceedings that will result in a decision on whether the law is constitutional….
The 2005 law requires doctors to tell women “that the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” Women also would have to be told they have a right to continue a pregnancy and that abortion may cause them psychological harm, including thoughts of suicide….
PP contends the measure would interfere in the relationship between doctors and patients and would require doctors to tell women untrue things….
“This law is unprecedented in the nation. It’s an unprecedented, extreme law that’s going to compel physicians to deliver state ideology,” Di Nicola said….
Only ignoramuses or liars could possibly attempt to argue abortion doesn’t end a human life. This is one point science, medicine, and religion all agree: the union of human sperm and human egg creates a separate, unique human life. This is Biology 101. Each species begats offspring from its own species.
[HT: reader Gary V.; photo is of a preborn at 12 weeks, the age most abortions are committed]
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“We will do what the law says, but clearly the law is extreme and flawed and
wrong.”
Yes. Clearly.
I wonder if Kathi or any of the other people who think the law is wrong would actually say specifically what is wrong with it rather than haphazardly throwing out words like “extreme” and “ideology.” Tell me exactly what part of “the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being” is untrue. I would love to have seen Kathi quoted as saying “Abortion does not end a human life.” But I don’t think these people are willing to go that far. They’ll just criticize it using euphemisms and broad language, never actually addressing any particulars.
Extreme and flawed and wrong?
Prove it. Produce images of unborn babies that clearly show plant life, duck life, dog life, etc., because it stands to reason that the life that is growing, the heart that is beating in a human woman is also a human life.
“PP contends the measure would interfere in the relationship between doctors and patients and would require doctors to tell women untrue things….”
————————————
yeah..why would PP want competition in telling pregnant women untrue things?
“yeah..why would PP want competition in telling pregnant women untrue things?”
LOL!
Well are they upset about the human life part, or the psychological harm and suicide part? One is certainly true, the other is still only a theory.
Anyways, unless they put cameras in patient rooms (which is most certainly illegal) how WOULD it be enforced?
Which is Theory, Amanda?
There is no theory when it comes to the psychological harm abortion causes. It is now part of Supreme Court doctrine. A brief was filed on behalf of Sandra Cano the Doe of Doe V Bolton. It included the testimonies of 180 women(mine too)hurt by abortion. The court recognized “that some women come to regret” their abortions. “Whether to have an abortion requires a difficult and painful moral decision” and is “fraught with emotional consequence” “severe depression and loss of esteem can follow”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg acknowledged, “the Court is surely correct that, for most women, abortion is a painfully difficult decision.”
The size of the problem is not known at this time, which is why Operation Outcry continues to collect the declarations from men and women hurt by abortion to further prolife legislation. The declarations continue to come in on a daily basis.
Some of the side effects of abortion are depression, sleeplessness, nightmares, thoughts of suicide and attempts, alcohol and drug abuse, low self esteem, guilt, shame and regret.
http://www.operationoutcry.org
The psychological harm/suicide connection being made to the act of having abortion alone – is still only a theory. Its a complicated one to prove one way or the other, because much of the time (and even pro lifers admit this) there is something going on in the womans life that is causing her to see the pregnancy as a bad thing not a good thing. Maybe its as trite as a boyfriend breaking up with her, but often its a lot more complicated – sexual absuse, domestic violence, drug problems, losing your job and having no where to go, etc.
For example, I’ve got a patient on my waiting list who’s father beat her so badly she has a brain injury. Her mom and her 3 other sisters are all living in a domestic violence shelter. Mom was trying to explain to me (without actually saying it) that she couldn’t bring her daughter in on a day I offered her an appointment because she was going to have an abortion. She’s from a foreign country – she came here with her husband – she has no where to go and no one to turn to and 4 young daughters, one with a brain injury, to take care of.
If she ends up depressed or suicidal, does it make ANY sense, from a logical point of view, to blame that on the abortion, and not the zillion other awful things going on in her life?
Thats why I’m not saying its true or untrue, just that its a theory, because we don’t have the means at this point to isolate ONE particuar reason, in situtions where there are usually MANY factors, as the cause for psychological problems and/or suicidal thoughts/attempts.
What would have to happen for you NOT to see it as a theory, Amanda?
Supreme Court doctrine doesn’t do it…..:)
It is your opinion that the harm of abortion is
only a theory.
It is not about placing blame. It is seeing abortion for what it is. The destruction of a human life and a woman hurt by the experience.
It is not complicated at all. Women and men fill out a declaration that states how abortion has affected their lives. The goal is one million declarations. I will let you know when we get there!!! You will be thrilled I am sure.
Amanda,
I am having a hard time with your post.
Pro-lifers admit that there is something going on in a woman’s life that causes her to see the pregnancy as a bad thing instead of a good thing?
Such as…….
Pro-aborts having done a great job instilling in women that a unplanned pregnancy is a “bad” thing no matter what that women may be doing in her life. She maybe a student who will never finish college unless she gets the abortion, she may be a lawyer who wants to make partner but won’t unless she ends the pregnancy, she may have two children already and certainly won’t be able to cope with another, etc…….the list goes on and on.
Pro-aborts have instilled that an unplanned pregnancy is a nuisance and can be taken care of immediately.
You site one example in your post above. I am sure that there are many women in her situation. However, there are many women who use abortion as a birth control method and find themselves very regretful afteward. I have met women like this. They had no idea that an abortion would have such a negative emotional impact on their lives which can last forever.
In your example, do you think abortion will be”good” for this young woman? What a horrific thing by the way!!! Do you think it could possibly add to the trauma she has already endured??
An abortion is trauma. It is a traumatic experience. Abortion is a trauma that adds to the trauma of rape and incest and the example above.
Gotta get the kiddoes to a playdate. Talk to ya.
One more thing then I really have to go…I MEAN IT! :)
If it is just a theory then why the need for post abortion recovery programs like Rachel’s Vineyard? Why Silent No More and websites like After Abortion? Why the thousands of women like myself that are speaking out about the harm that abortion has caused in their lives?
“PP contends the measure would interfere in the relationship between doctors and patients”
LOL!!
This is the same crappity-crap rhetoric that Minnesota NARAL gave to us when we met with them when trying to pass our “Greiving Parents’ Act”
which would require notification to parents on options to bury their miscarried babies. No mandates. Just notification. Didn’t even have to be done by a Dr., just a medical professional who would have met with the parents.
We were linked on the NARAL legislation alert on their website as being an “anti-abortion vehicle.” “This bill would chip away at abortion rights”
*rolls eyes*
We decided to have a friendly conversation with them to help them understand that women already have the right to bury their miscarried babies, but often times are not being told about their options and have major regrets later on when they find out their baby was incerated with medical waste. Sounds fair right??
After our friendly conversation we were moved right up on the home page of their website. So much for friendly conversation. They had inflamatory misleading “untruths” regarding our bill which were very misleading.
How exactly does notification of a womens’ options to bury her baby interfere with the Dr.-patient relationship?
It would create much needed dialog to help women and their families make better decisions for themselves during a very difficult time.
How ironic that we wanted to offer “choices” to women, but the NARAL “PRO-CHOICE” MINNESOTA wasn’t all about choice afterall.
PS,
Yes. The photo of the 12 week old fetus looks “nothing” like a human.
With the human hands, human fingers, human neck, human head, human legs, human organs, I can see how misleading it would be to inform a woman she is carrying a whole, unique, separate human being.
Amanda: Thats why I’m not saying its true or untrue, just that its a theory, because we don’t have the means at this point to isolate ONE particuar reason, in situtions where there are usually MANY factors, as the cause for psychological problems and/or suicidal thoughts/attempts.
Yeah, and it’s also trying to get doctors to put a very subjective spin on things – it’s like telling women who want to continue pregnancies, “This could turn you into an Andrea Yates.”
Doug,
How can it be subjective when as Carla points out so many post-abortive groups that have started around the country to help women deal with their abortions.
When people go in for any surgery they are informed of all the risks. Even death. Should they not be informed of all the risks?
Do you not want to know all of the risks prior to making a decision about an elective surgery?
Doug,
Also forgot to add: Medical professionals are now trained better to dectect PPD in women. They are on the alert everytime they come into contact with the woman. Whether it be a lactation consultant or an LPN taking vitals. They know this is not a subjective issue, but a very real threat to women and their families.
All women in my state are now given information on the issue and are better informed to monitor themselves as well. 145.906, Minnesota Statutes 2007
Copyright
Do you realize that these days, because of cases like Yates’, women who are pregnant, near delivery, or have recently delivered, are told of the psychological risks associated. At least I know I was with my last pregnancy, which was quite recently. At this point, it’s just removing a double standard.
Sandy, 12:47p, said: “Pro-aborts having done a great job instilling in women that a unplanned pregnancy is a “bad” thing no matter what that women may be doing in her life.”
Excellent, profound point, Sandy. Pro-aborts have no problem telling women pregnancies can be psychologically damaging. But abortions cannot be?
Yeah Jill, a half-truth is more damaging than an outright lie.
Amanda said: Thats why I’m not saying its true or untrue, just that its a theory, because we don’t have the means at this point to isolate ONE particuar reason, in situtions where there are usually MANY factors, as the cause for psychological problems and/or suicidal thoughts/attempts.
Doug said: Yeah, and it’s also trying to get doctors to put a very subjective spin on things – it’s like telling women who want to continue pregnancies, “This could turn you into an Andrea Yates.”
“A subjective spin”? This coming from Mr. Subjective himself? (Sorry, but it’s true.) Doctors diagnoses are always subjective. Some say medicine is an ART. Doctors make educated assesments based on the data they have. So why would a respectable doctor have a reason to put a spin on anything? He’d be risking his reputation and his medical license.
Yeah, I can understand how being forced to admit that an abortion kills a real live human being would just ruin your whole day…. especially if you make your living by killing real, live human beings.
Sandy, I agree that women considering abortions should be informed of all the risks, but that should be limited to the REAL risks, not the ones that were invented for political reasons. Yes, some women come to feel bad about having had abortions–even Planned Parenthood says so on its website–but there’s a difference between “You might regret it,” and anti-abortion politics dressed up as medicine.
This law is not right. The idea that an unborn is a human life is a spiritual and philosophical distinction. To force doctors to say that a fetus is a human life might lead women to believe that that is the position of medical science and it is not.
Science can tell us when the egg fuses with sperm to form a unique genetic code, when the three layers of tissue start to form, when the fetus develops detectable nerve activity and when it takes its first breath and when it says its first word, but NONE of those things answer the question “What is life?” or “What is a human being?”
Is it possible to come to the conclusion that an embryo is a human life? Yes. Is that the only conclusion to which a rational, compassionate person may come? HECK NO.
Amen, Doyle, amen!!
DRF: Is it possible to come to the conclusion that an embryo is a human life? Yes. Is that the only conclusion to which a rational, compassionate person may come? HECK NO.
What are you thinking? HECK YES! (Where’s Patricia with all of her medical references?)
DRF,
“but NONE of those things answer the question “What is life?” or “What is a human being?””
If one is really this agnostic about what life is, than none of us are safe. What science can tell us is that biologically, we were all once an embryo. We were neither a sperm cell nor an oocyte. Many people are not aware of this. In fact, any woman who is seriously contemplating the question “what is life” will not be affected in the least by a doctor telling her that the embryo/fetus is a human being.
Janet,
I have tons of quotes too, but the scientific aspect of the question is not what DRF is talking about. (S)He means “what is life” in the philosophical sense. I’m not saying (s)he does this, but this question is usually asked and discussed so that people can define life in a way that excludes those that they wish to exclude from being considered “alive” like embryos.
DRF,
Which REAL risks were invented for political reasons?
I did a heckuva lot more than “feel bad” after my abortion.
Per DRF:
Sandy, I agree that women considering abortions should be informed of all the risks, but that should be limited to the REAL risks, not the ones that were invented for political reasons. Yes, some women come to feel bad about having had abortions–even Planned Parenthood says so on its website–but there’s a difference between “You might regret it,” and anti-abortion politics dressed up as medicine.
DRF:
You think PAS was invented for political reasons?
What other risks do you think were invented for political reasons??
What about all of the ridiculous lies women have been told by the abortion industry over the last 30 years.
“It’s just a blob of tissue” for starters. That’s just for starters.
What about the lie of ommission of NARAL not wanting consistent accurate information given to women about their options and rights to bury their miscarried babies??
For their own political agenda, they want this important little tid bit hidden away because “oh my gosh” someone might think of their lost baby as a baby. Better to keep women ignorant of the facts.
Have you ever met anyone who has suffered depression and dispair after abortion? I have. Don’t tell me this is not a real risk for women.
Sandy: How can it be subjective when as Carla points out so many post-abortive groups that have started around the country to help women deal with their abortions.
It’s subjective because in no way will a given woman have that experience.
…..
When people go in for any surgery they are informed of all the risks. Even death. Should they not be informed of all the risks?
Sure, but if we are to draw a true balance then the risks of continuing pregnancies should be mentioned as well, and the prevalence and the severity of post-partum-depression symptoms, etc.
……
Medical professionals are now trained better to dectect PPD in women. They are on the alert everytime they come into contact with the woman. Whether it be a lactation consultant or an LPN taking vitals. They know this is not a subjective issue, but a very real threat to women and their families.
Sandy, okay – sounds good. Thus, they don’t need to try and “scare” women beforehand who are thinking about having kids – that would be putting the subjective spin on it.
Sandy: Pro-aborts have instilled that an unplanned pregnancy is a nuisance and can be taken care of immediately.
First of all, anybody that would actually be “pro-abortion” would not be pro-choice.
You are also wrong about the “unplanned” pregnancy. That is not the deal with pro-choicers. Many an unplanned pregnancy is continued willingly, and that is just fine with pro-choicers.
It is when a pregnancy is unwanted that pro-choicers are for the woman having the legal freedom that she now does. It is up to her, not up to anybody else, and pro-choicers are not saying she “should” do anything. They’re not saying it’s a “nuisance” if the woman doesn’t feel that way.
Doug said: Yeah, and it’s also trying to get doctors to put a very subjective spin on things – it’s like telling women who want to continue pregnancies, “This could turn you into an Andrea Yates.”
Janet: “A subjective spin”? This coming from Mr. Subjective himself? (Sorry, but it’s true.)
Why pretend that things are other than they are? I would say because many times people know their position is not as strong nor nearly as generally true as they maintain, and either consciously or subconsciously they have that need to pretend.
…..
Doctors diagnoses are always subjective. Some say medicine is an ART. Doctors make educated assesments based on the data they have. So why would a respectable doctor have a reason to put a spin on anything? He’d be risking his reputation and his medical license.
Why would a respectable doctor need to be told by legislators to do stuff in line with the legislators admittedly biased objectives (the “state ideology”)?
Perhaps the law will be found to be unconstitutional – I don’t know. But it’s certainly a question because the same legislators would probably not be in favor of telling pregnant women that “there’s more risk to you if you continue the pregnancy than if you have an abortion, especially an early-term abortion,” etc.
Per Doug:
Why would a respectable doctor need to be told by legislators to do stuff in line with the legislators admittedly biased objectives (the “state ideology”)?
Doug,
Where do you read that this is an admittedly biased objective??????? Please source.
The medical profession must follow many self and state regulations. ie, like the one I posted above on post partum depression. Someone I suppose could consider that a biased objective of the bill would be to increase the pocket books of drug manufactures and pycho therapists etc….but we all know that the main goal is to really help women understand and be aware of issues that may arise so they can be dealt with accordingly for the betterment of her and her families health.
The myth that the abortion industry has lived by for 30 years is that it is just a blob of tissue.
This lie needs to be dispelled. Women need to understand exactly what they are doing and who they are doing it to.
Why do the pro-aborts fight ultrasounds being shown to women prior to the procedure?
Because they know if they see the truth, the vast majority will opt out of the procedure.
I think the politically biased reason the pro-aborts have for not wanting this information out is that they are afraid it will further diminish their pocket books.
“Why would a respectable doctor need to be told by legislators to do stuff in line with the legislators admittedly biased objectives (the “state ideology”)?”
Sandy: Doug, Where do you read that this is an admittedly biased objective??????? Please source.
Because there definitely is a political component to it. It’s not simply a matter of providing information. Thus my comment that those same legislators wouldn’t want it said that, “There’s more risk to you if you continue the pregnancy than if you have an abortion, especially an early-term abortion,” etc.”
The myth that the abortion industry has lived by for 30 years is that it is just a blob of tissue.
To a point in gestation, that’s true. Yet afterwards, the phases of embryo and fetus are hardly any big secret.
……
Why do the pro-aborts fight ultrasounds being shown to women prior to the procedure? Because they know if they see the truth, the vast majority will opt out of the procedure.
Again, if you have somebody who is actually “pro-abortion” then you’re not talking about pro-choicers. Personally, I don’t mind providing ultrasounds to women if they want to view them.
I question that the “vast majority” would opt out of abortions if they saw an ultrasound.
Carla, you wrote: “If it is just a theory then why the need for post abortion recovery programs like Rachel’s Vineyard? Why Silent No More and websites like After Abortion? ”
These sites are propaganda sites whose goal is to pass new restrictions on abortion. There is no other “need” for them.
SoMG, are you claiming that the women involved with those groups are lying about their experiences with abortion?
I think he is, Jen R. I imagine he thinks that the women have been led to believe that they feel guilty by these organizations or by pro-lifers in general. Which is insulting and invalidating to the women who regret their abortions, of course.
I hate when people say that women are lying about regretting their abortions, just like I hate when people accuse women of lying or being in denial about not regretting their abortions.
Jen R, the sites are lying about how common it is. Also, yes, SOME of the women are certainly lying or at least exaggerating.
If I were in South Dakota, I would obey the law and tell patients they have a right to continue a pregnancy (I already do that) and that abortion may cause them psychological harm, including thoughts of suicide, but I would add that childbirth does the same but worse, particular childbirth of an unwanted pregnancy.
And yes, Alexandra, ALL the women I have ever spoken with who say they regret their abortions have been members of politically-active Christian RTL sects with the demonstrated ability to exert some control over what their members think.
SoMG, why do you assume causation rather than just correlation? Maybe a mid-life change of beliefs influences both views on abortion and views on religion — rather than views on religion affecting views on abortion independent of any emotional changes within the person.
Maybe having a troubled youth — the sort that can result in an unplanned pregnancy — leads a person to regret their actions, which in turn eventually leads them to religious belief (ie doing things a different way).
I don’t know anyone who has changed their beliefs as an adult who does not have some regrets — and this includes people who left the church (or the mosque — several of my friends were raised by strict Muslim parents). You change because you no longer agree with the way you were living your life — and if you don’t agree with the way you were living your life, it’s easy to regret some of the things you did.
Most of the women I have spoken with who regret their abortions are religious, this is true, but I also think that most support for women who regret their abortions is religious — so the two often go hand in hand, and religion becomes part of the healing just because it’s often the only healing available. But even in that case, the woman is seeking it out, which would indicate that she is hurting on some level.
Alexandra, you’re right, it could be correlation without causation. Or it could be converse causation–maybe post-abortion pain causes a certain number of women to seek out RTL sects. If I were sure the sects were causing the pain, I would start warning patients to avoid them.
And now that I think of it what I said before was wrong–I DO know women who are NOT members of Christian RTL sects, who say they sometimes feel regret for their abortions. What I had in mind was the ones who say it has ruined or significantly damaged their lives–in my experience those are all members of politically-active Christian RTL sects with demonstrated ability to exert some control over what their members think.
SoMG: 10:41:
Do you think that praying in front of an abortion clinic is political action?
Do you think teaching abstinence is political action?
Do you think warning women abortion may have adverse effects on their psyches is political action?
If you answer yes, you are wrong. I care about the killing of unborn babies and the mothers who feel so lost that they feel they have no other choice. For types like us, it is not political at all. It’s pro-choicers who turned abortion into a political game back in the 1970’s.
Since when is a Christian RTL’r a member of a “RTL sect”? There are RTL’rs of all religions and denominations. No brain washing going on.
Janet, to all three questions I would say it can be yes or no depending on the further circumstances. When Randall Terry prayed in front of Dr. Hern’s clinic that Dr. Hern would soon be executed, yes I would say that was political. In fact let me change that and say I think (almost) all public prayer is political. Prosletizing is inherently political and almost all public prayer is prosletizing in disguise. I suppose it is possible to imagine cases of non-political public prayer but I doubt there are any real ones.
Teaching abstinence? No I wouldn’t say that’s necessarily a political act, both sides do it. PP does it.
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/health-topics/birth-control/abstinence-4215.htm#disadvantages
Warning patients about adverse effects on their psyches, is that political? Unless you add that pregnancy and childbirth especially unwanted or unplanned can also have adverse effects on your psyche, and that most professionals who study it think pregnancy and childbirth are a greater cause of adverse effects on your psyche, especially if you can’t afford child care, than abortion, it’s a lie of omission. Does that make it “political action”? I’m not sure. Needless to say, trying to pass a bill that would require abortion docs to issue such a warning certainly is political action.
You want a good book to read on this? http://www.amazon.com/Mother-Knot-Jane-Lazarre/dp/0822320398
You wrote: “It’s pro-choicers who turned abortion into a political game back in the 1970’s.”
Sure. Like it was those pesky abolitionists who turned universal freedom into a political game in the 1830s.
Oh and Janet I didn’t say all Christian RTLs are members of sects. Just the women I personally have met who said their abortions had significant negative effects on their lives were also members of small Christian RTL sects. Where I used to live there were a lot of small and medium-sized rural Christian RTL sects. Race-cults too. Christian Identity. Public demonstrations against “black crime”.
SoMG,
Rachel’s Vineyard is not a “site” Yes it has a website. It is a weekend retreat held across the nation by women who have been hurt by abortion and want to help others in their recovery. It is an amazing weekend of healing and hope.
Silent No More is not a “site” Yes, it has a website but it is an organized group of women who regret their abortions that speak out on college campuses, at state capitols and The March for Life. They are warriors who will NOT be silent anymore on the ways abortion hurts women and men.
Operation Outcry has a website. It is more than that. We collect declarations across the United States for use in prolife legislation. Women and men fill out a declaration telling how abortion has affected their lives. We now have the largest body of evidence in the world of legal documentation that is admissable in court.
After Abortion is a website. You were right about that.
There are so many more abortion recovery programs that I am missing. Sorry. I gave you a few. You can continue to say their is no need, because somehow that must make you feel better about what you do.
I often wonder how many women I have met who went to you to have their children killed. What are the odds?
SOMG, as of today, you’ve been banned for 2 weeks from this site. You can continue any discussions later, or you can continue via email with moderators.
These sites are propaganda sites whose goal is to pass new restrictions on abortion. There is no other “need” for them.
Posted by: SoMG at July 18, 2008 7:50 PM
Yeah right! Tell that to a woman who deeply regrets her abortion(s) and is suffering from depression and other problems. You have absolutely ZERO empathy with women at all. Pathetic.
Just the women I personally have met who said their abortions had significant negative effects on their lives were also members of small Christian RTL sects.
SO WHAT? What is a sect – you mean a religion. Stop being so blasted bigoted!
Maybe once a woman realizes that there IS a higher being – God who loves her despite what she’s done to her baby – maybe that’s when the enormity of what’s she’s done hits her. You too will face this realization – either in this life or eventually in the next.
If I were in South Dakota, I would obey the law and tell patients they have a right to continue a pregnancy (I already do that) and that abortion may cause them psychological harm, including thoughts of suicide, but I would add that childbirth does the same but worse, particular childbirth of an unwanted pregnancy.
Posted by: SoMG at July 18, 2008 8:16 PM
Then you would be lying and committing medical malpractice since you KNOW intellectually that childbirth does not produce the same rates of suicide and depression as does abortion. You just don’t want to accept it because it’s part of your rationalization process to calm your conscience about what you do for a living.
Guess I’ll have to wait for you to learn to post decently. I’ve got my opinion in Somg. Have a nice layoff! :-P
Anyways, unless they put cameras in patient rooms (which is most certainly illegal) how WOULD it be enforced?
Posted by: Amanda at July 18, 2008 11:44 AM
Easy, have the patient sign a form that clearly states in writing that she was told and have the specific language required right there in black and white on the consent form. This is done all the time on all kinds of legal documents.
hippie: 3:01: Easy, have the patient sign a form that clearly states in writing that she was told and have the specific language required right there in black and white on the consent form. This is done all the time on all kinds of legal documents.
Sounds like a solution to me!
What irritates me to no end is the argument that women who have abortions wouldn’t do it ‘if only they knew what they were doing.’ How patronizing. Women is this situation know quite clearly what they are doing – and what they are about to sacrifice. I think what confounds many on the PL side is that women know it…know that they’re ending a human life…and still go through with it.
I discussed this in an other thread, but you get the point. Women are aware of what abortion is. They still make the choice to have one. Yes, it is a life changing decision. A difficult, heavy decision. They’re aware of that, too. Some will regret it, some will not. The end.
I’m fine with the other side continuing to fight for their beliefs and offering (honest, educated and unbiased) support to those who seek it out, but please stop with the defense that women are not smart enough to know what they’re getting into.
I’m fine with the other side continuing to fight for their beliefs and offering (honest, educated and unbiased) support to those who seek it out, but please stop with the defense that women are not smart enough to know what they’re getting into.
Posted by: Danielle at July 21, 2008 10:18 PM
Did you know there are schools in the U.S. that are so poor they do not have textbooks? There are kids who drop out of high school after sophomore year and cannot read. There are also kids who ditch school for half the school year and somehow they still graduate. Do you think they might be the ones missing biology class and getting pregnant instead?
There is a very good chance that there are women who have never seen a picture of a blastocyst or an embryo or fetus in the womb. Don’t you think those women have a right to know what they are doing? Or should we just assume they know, and get on with the abortion?