North Dakota judge strikes down abortion medication law

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,329
47
Florida
✟118,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,652
16,433
Flyoverland
✟1,261,354.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
This is an interesting article. In North Dakota doctors were required to lie to their patients who wanted to have medical abortions, saying it may be reversed. Other states do too, but only ND was challenged for it. The state lost.

Medication abortion reversal is "devoid of scientific support," judge rules in North Dakota today - CBS News
Chemical abortions that can be reversed if it is done quickly. North Dakota was correct. Some people just don't want to hear such things or allow others to hear it.
 
Upvote 0

GodLovesCats

Well-Known Member
Mar 16, 2019
7,401
1,329
47
Florida
✟118,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Chemical abortions that can be reversed if it is done quickly. North Dakota was correct. Some people just don't want to hear such things or allow others to hear it.

Like before a woman has had enough time to change her mind and get back to North Dakota's only clinic?
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,652
16,433
Flyoverland
✟1,261,354.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Like before a woman has had enough time to change her mind and get back to North Dakota's only clinic?
North Dakota has some decent hospitals up on the windswept prairie. If a woman is lucky enough to be near one of them, if the hospital is well equipped, and if the right doctor can get to the hospital in time, then the chemical abortion can probably be reversed. I doubt Red River Women's Clinic in Fargo, the lone abortuary on the prairie, would be eager to do a reversal. But any really good hospital could do it.

A chemical abortion differs from a surgical abortion in that the woman administers the drugs to herself. In a surgical abortion the doctor does it all and the woman may be anesthetized through the process. With these human pesticides the woman goes into premature delivery of her baby alone, bleeds, delivers the dead baby, and has to dispose of her own child, contemplating what she chose to do. It is not an experience I would wish on anyone. It is barbaric. And now legal again in North Dakota.

Do they still use methotrexate? It's a nasty drug.
 
Upvote 0

chevyontheriver

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Sep 29, 2015
19,652
16,433
Flyoverland
✟1,261,354.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
Even if chemical abortion is reversible, the judge was correct that doctors should not be required to say it against their beliefs. It is a freedom of speech issue when doctors know what lawmakers did not.
Oh, so is forcing a pro-life person to refer for an abortion similarly not OK? Is it not OK to force a medical student to participate in an abortion as part of learning their trade? How about a pharmacist who does not want to dispense such poisons, do they have a right to say no?
 
Upvote 0