Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Emergency abortions aren't happening in a private practice office, but at hospital emergency rooms with teams of not only doctors, nurses, anesthesiologists, etc. Whether an abortion is allowed to take place is not at the sole discretion of the ob-gyn, but also the administrators, lawyers, etc.They aren't saying they refused to treat the woman, only that it didn't appear she needed emergency care at the moment, and when it did become clear she needed medical care, it was too late. Medical shizzle happens, and they just shrug.
If I'm not mistaken, all the cases we've been discussing to this point have been emergencies.Emergency abortions aren't happening in a private practice office, but at hospital emergency rooms with teams of not only doctors, nurses, anesthesiologists, etc. Whether an abortion is allowed to take place is not at the sole discretion of the ob-gyn, but also the administrators, lawyers, etc.
Yes, and ?If I'm not mistaken, all the cases we've been discussing to this point have been emergencies.
I have a personal viewpoint because I'm intimately acquainted with such an incident here in Texas that occurred with a family member a couple of months ago. In this case, she was not pregnant, but suffers from fibroids in the uterus that cause extremely heavy bleeding...to a life-threatening extent. The doctor on call was hesitant, not believing she wasn't actually pregnant. She had to lie and claim another particular ailment to get him to see to her before she literally bled out.Yes, and ?
You seem to want to blame individual doctors as though they make the decisions in a vacuum and not as part of a larger team.
and sometimes it is better to do the right thing even if it means you do time for it.Emergencies often kill people, even when treated. In TX you have to wait until a known condition becomes an emergency - in this case blood sepsis - before giving the necessary treatment. If you fail to wait, theres 99 years in prison hanging over your head.
I was under the impression that it was in any circumstance, and per the site rules, never, ever the “right thing” to do.and sometimes it is better to do the right thing even if it means you do time for it.
That's why I said that doctors need to get as brave as Rosa Parks and make the law prove itself in court.I was under the impression that it was in any circumstance, and per the site rules, never, ever the “right thing” to do.
Interesting.
Having emergency care isn't an elective abortion...I will die on this hill as a passionately pro-life person...I believe ALL women, children, born and pre-born, should be saved and protected....Emergency abortions aren't happening in a private practice office, but at hospital emergency rooms with teams of not only doctors, nurses, anesthesiologists, etc. Whether an abortion is allowed to take place is not at the sole discretion of the ob-gyn, but also the administrators, lawyers, etc.
Are you pro-life?That's why I said that doctors need to get as brave as Rosa Parks and make the law prove itself in court.
I am in favor of keeping as many lives safe as possible, particularly when those lives are in my hands to save.Are you pro-life?
ok...I am in favor of keeping as many lives safe as possible, particularly when those lives are in my hands to save.
Her case highlights the severe impact of Texas's strict abortion laws, which have created confusion and fear among healthcare providers. These laws can lead to delays in treatment, as doctors may hesitate to intervene due to potential legal repercussions. Nevaeh's situation is a stark reminder of the real-life consequences of such policies.No state has done more to fight this interpretation than Texas, which has warned doctors that its abortion ban supersedes the administration’s guidance on federal law, and that they can face up to 99 years in prison for violating it.
I believe pro life should be preached with wisdom and firmness spiritually and with practical counsel on the individual level.That is a different question: Regardless what the state does or doesn't do, how should the Church go about saving the lives of babies using "Holy Spirit authorized" methods? "The weapons of our warfare are not carnal."
People can’t really answer that on here because saying anything but yes is against the rules. Just fyi.Are you pro-life?
Except, of course, Rosa Parks wasn’t facing 99 years in jail or the option of letting somebody die.That's why I said that doctors need to get as brave as Rosa Parks and make the law prove itself in court.
That makes no sense. Often before a procedure, such as barium trace which would harm a fetus, I've not only had to sign that I was not pregnant, but given a spot pregnancy test right then and there. Furthermore, it is not illegal to treat fibroids either with a D&C or a hysterectomy so no, this is not analogous. According to many of these states' laws, abortion for an obviously unviable fetus remains illegal until it becomes imminently, not simply inevitably, foreseeably life-threatening to the woman.I have a personal viewpoint because I'm intimately acquainted with such an incident here in Texas that occurred with a family member a couple of months ago. In this case, she was not pregnant, but suffers from fibroids in the uterus that cause extremely heavy bleeding...to a life-threatening extent. The doctor on call was hesitant, not believing she wasn't actually pregnant. She had to lie and claim another particular ailment to get him to see to her before she literally bled out.
What, no team at all? Just a lone doctor all on his own? You know this because....?And, no, there was no "larger team" making that decision that night in that moment. They didn't have a lawyer in the emergency room or anything like that.
Im not sure that the law says thou must treat emergency situations. That comes from medical ethics. Thats why doctors aren't charged everytime they misdiagnose or do malpractice.If you're asserting they did break the law by not treating the women who died, why are they not being charged?
For context, in another thread SavedbyGrace [I think] has been asserting that the doctors were legally required to treat these emergencies. (So for them, this is a much more biting question. If these doctors are flouting the law, why aren't they being charged with these deaths?)Im not sure that the law says thou must treat emergency situations.
You don't understand the context: They would not touch her at all. They would not administer a test. Hands totally off. Hands in pockets. Period.That makes no sense. Often before a procedure, such as barium trace which would harm a fetus, I've not only had to sign that I was not pregnant, but given a spot pregnancy test right then and there. Furthermore, it is not illegal to treat fibroids either with a D&C or a hysterectomy so no, this is not analogous. According to many of these states' laws, abortion for an obviously unviable fetus remains illegal until it becomes imminently, not simply inevitably, foreseeably life-threatening to the woman.
You don't understand the context of the times. In 1954 Alabama, there was a not inconsiderable chance nobody would ever see her again. There was a better than even chance she'd be brutally beaten or raped in jail.Except, of course, Rosa Parks wasn’t facing 99 years in jail or the option of letting somebody die.
Yes, it is.Constructing and enacting a law you know to be flawed and waiting to see who wants to be the guinea pig in challenging it or dying from it to prove that it is, in fact, flawed is more than a little perverse.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?