Topic: Supreme Court decision on Abortion?

[Hicks]

Me too.  Now go find a doctor that thinks this is a good practice...  I think most would have another method.

J

If no doctor will perform the procedure, then why outlaw it?

[tet]

If no doctor will perform the procedure, then why outlaw it?

"if Lt. Kendrick gave the order that Santiago wasn't to be touched, then why did he have to be transferred?  colonel?"

[birdman]

   Partial birth abortions, in the end, are the same as a standard abortion.  This type of procedure is generally used when there are medical problems with the mother. If she has problems with excessive bleeding, a "standard" abortion could cause her to hemmorrage, leading to a number of medical problems.
   The problem with them banning this procedure (other than a group deciding what you can/cant do with your body) is that they dont allow for the mothers health to be considered. If the mother has a health issue the doctors CANNOT perform this procedure even if it will save the mothers life. Once again, Womans Health has taken a HUGE set back.


 In the end, the right wing zealots have gotten their foot in the door on abortion and holding back personal freedoms...way to go America

[tet]

actually, slight correction on that. 

they are only allowed to perform this if the mother's life is in danger.  so, if she will die otherwise, they will perform it.  when it's her health that is at stake, and she would likely live, then it is illegal.  that was the essence of the court hearing, whether or not that provision was constitutional. 

[birdman]

actually, slight correction on that. 

they are only allowed to perform this if the mother's life is in danger.  so, if she will die otherwise, they will perform it.  when it's her health that is at stake, and she would likely live, then it is illegal.  that was the essence of the court hearing, whether or not that provision was constitutional. 

Wrong!
"The law is constitutional despite not containing an exception that would allow the procedure if needed to preserve a woman's health, Kennedy said. "The law need not give abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their medical practice," he wrote in the majority opinion.

Doctors who violate the law face up to two years in federal prison."

[slslbs]

this is from the NY Times. I interpreted it to mean that the law was written to provide an exception when it comes to saving the woman's life.

Congress passed the law in response to the court’s ruling in the Nebraska case, responding specifically to the majority’s insistence in that case that the law must include an exception for circumstances when the banned procedure was necessary for the sake of a pregnant woman’s health. Congress provided an exception only to save a pregnant woman’s life, as Nebraska had, declaring that the procedure was never necessary for a woman’s health.

maybe Kennedy doesn't think that provision needs to be there.

[birdman]

Look again..
"Even more chilling, though, are the implications of the court’s approach. Supporters of abortion rights have reason to be alarmed by the majority’s decision, for the first time since Roe v. Wade, to uphold an abortion restriction that makes no exception for a woman’s health; its elevation of the importance of the state interest in protecting the fetus throughout pregnancy; and its cavalier willingness to uphold the law absent proof that it “would be unconstitutional in a large fraction of relevant cases.”

Also NYT "
 The decision recast the court’s approach to abortion, shifting its emphasis toward fetal life and away from deference to medical judgments about women’s health."

Edit: Hmm, maybe mortal danger does play a factor
" And Justice Anthony Kennedy's majority opinion did uphold an exception when the life of the mother is threatened (which is the setting for many intact D&X's anyway). "


   So when is her life at risk...If you know ahead of time the girl may have an issure, after you start to perform a normal abortion and she suddenly goes vital then you finish with the procedure you should have started with anyway.
 -Just the gov. making it harder for docs to do their job if you ask me.

[tet]

health != life

you keep quoting the same thing.  the point made by the Supreme Court was that a woman's health (= organ damage, infertility, etc) should not matter, only whether or not she will live.  if she will live, the procedure is illegal, irrelevant of any health issues she may have from it.  if she will die, the procedure is legal, as per a provision in the law.  the entire point of the case was the lack of a health exception, not a life exception. 

[birdman]

   So its ok for a woman to get one kind of aborion that may leave her disabled for life, but not ok for another, more suitable(for her) abortion that leaves her healthy?  Doesn't make sense to me.

[tet]

   So its ok for a woman to get one kind of aborion that may leave her disabled for life, but not ok for another, more suitable(for her) abortion that leaves her healthy?  Doesn't make sense to me.

i'm not saying it makes sense.  but that's the law.  the way you disagreed with me initially, you indicated it didn't matter whether or not the woman was going to die, which was incorrect.  that's all i'm trying to point out.

the law itself is ridiculous, because nobody should be making medical decisions other than doctors.  nobody. 

EDIT:  i see you edited your above post with the correct provisions of the law, nullifying my subsequent response.

[birdman]

  I wasn't trying to bash you, tet.  I get angry in general about these issues. Jjust get a bit hyped about seeing our personal freedoms slowly drawn away from us by laws that make no sense in the first place

[tet]

  I wasn't trying to bash you, tet.  I get angry in general about these issues. Jjust get a bit hyped about seeing our personal freedoms slowly drawn away from us by laws that make no sense in the first place

i didn't take it personally...  and i too get angry about such issues.

i usually try to avoid such discussions, but i did just want to make sure you were fully aware of the circumstances surrounding the law's enforcement before making a complete decision on it.  it's best to have all the facts in front of us before engaging in such debates.  i certainly did not intend to take away from your position at all. 

[Hicks]

 

Damn, some heat up in this mutha!   

I'd just like to state for the record that "partial birth" abortion, is NOT a medical term.

[susep]

I'd just like to state for the record that "partial birth" abortion, is NOT a medical term.

nope, its a christian right definition?

[danje]

I look foward to the day technology makes abortion a non-issue.