Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Michael R on April 12, 2010 at 5:25pm

Who will be conducting this examination? Mental or physical side-effects after the procedure...I would think every women would have some kind of side-effects. Is any this spelled out in the law?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Morgan Matthew on April 12, 2010 at 5:38pm

I am hands down pro choice. I honestly can not see this as being a good thing. I agree with Michael, "Who will be conducting this examination? Mental or physical side-effects after the procedure." This to me sounds like even more fee's and intimidation to scare people away from getting checked out. Also this was a comment I saved a few days ago from the daily beast that I may make a We Think Atheist video about:

Whatever we do let's make sure we have billions more starving, dying, malnourished and poverty stricken humans brought into this world for the sake of a misguided religious belief. The human suffering that is openly praised and promoted by these so call people for life is scandalous. Most of them could care less about living breathing humans. Their only interest in the issue is to control woman's reproductive issues. Their interest leaves once the poor hapless fetus is out of the womb. They go back to being the cold calloused people they have always been.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Misty: Baytheist Living! on April 12, 2010 at 5:41pm

It sounds like a bunch of bullshit to me.
I mean, first of all, doctors are already legally obligated to explain all potential risks to patients. They do that with every single surgery/procedure in America. This bill won't change anything. It is already done.

I'm a little confused by the language in the article. It goes between past and present tense a bit. Does it mean that it will be a pre-screening or a post-screening? Is this for information gathering or for influencing a woman's decision? Is it to protect women or protect lumps of tissue deemed "sanctified human life" by the right?

Like.. I'm confused by the intent of the bill. It seems to be redundant, as I understand it.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Morgan Matthew on April 12, 2010 at 5:44pm

I think that is the point of it. Confuse and scare people away... Just brutal!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Misty: Baytheist Living! on April 12, 2010 at 5:46pm

Damn. I was hoping that it was just a little bone thrown for the repugs.
"Hey look! We are controlling abortion" cough cough. "Shh.. just don't tell them that nothing is actually changing..."

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Graham E. Lau on April 12, 2010 at 6:51pm

A lot of women have mental and physical side effects after giving birth as well... So what are they looking to test? When my ex and I gave our son up for adoption we both suffered some serious mental side effects and she will have the c-section scar for the rest of her life. So should we have been tested before making that decision? This is just a bunch of bullshit...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cara Coleen on April 13, 2010 at 2:22pm

You're absolutely right. No one ever considers what the side effects from giving birth could be and commonly are. My older brother broke my mother's tail bone on his way out (weighing 10lb); I was 10.5 and my younger brother was 11lbs!!! In her late forties, she finally had a tummy tuck (imagine the stretch marks... or, on second though, don't), but it was only because she was already going in for a hysterectomy/bladder suspension. Upon further "investigation", it was discovered we had had split her abs! Needless to say, she has lots of scars and many complications because of childbirth. Having a child is just as big of a risk as having an abortion, if not more so. If we'd lived even 100 years ago, my mother would not have survived.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on April 12, 2010 at 7:02pm

Short answer: I think it's a load of shit.

Long answer: I think it's a complete load of shit.




Okay, okay, maybe that doesn't explain much, but does a move like this even warrant a fair response? Mental and physical risk is a possibility with a great many procedures. If there are already known mental or physical health issues present then they should be factored into medical decisions as appropriate, but you shouldn't require a psychological exam with the intent of searching out new disorders just to disqualify someone from a procedure...

... and even if that was a reasonable practice, it should be applied universally to the entire field of medicine. What if I want to get pectoral implants? There could be physical health complications. I could be doing it as the result of some sort of mental disorder, or perhaps my significant other might have pressured me into doing it. I could suffer mental troubles after the surgery due to self-image and esteem issues. Oh man, I just realized how serious this all is! Why isn't anyone out there forming new policies to save me from myself!

Even if someone is suspected of having been pressured or being a touch off in the head (aren't we all?), what then? Nothing. There's nothing they can do. They go ahead with the procedure anyway.

edit: That said, I'm just ranting about nothing in particular (because I can). Until I read the actual policy as proposed, I can't claim to have any sort of informed opinion on the matter at hand.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Cara Coleen on April 13, 2010 at 2:25pm

Yeah... and what would the results of the findings be? "Hey, you're clearly mentally and emotionally unstable; you need to have this child." That makes sense! The psychologically damaged are clearly the types that should be parents.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kris Feenstra on April 13, 2010 at 3:37pm

It only makes sense to suggest that they carry to term though. I mean, it's not like there are any psychological and physical health risks and complications associated with pregnancy, child birth and child care. No, none whatsoever. Sure, I've never been pregnant... or even a woman for that matter, but I bet the whole pregnancy thing is a cakewalk. o_O

I think what really gets to me is that this proposal is disrespectful to women under the guise of protecting women's health. "Equality Before the Law" my ass. F'n misogyny. (grrrrr)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Profound_Raincloud on April 12, 2010 at 8:44pm

WOW. This is insane. I am sure the doctor will explain the procedure and do screening without this. Also what will they screen for if they feel the abortion would be too hard on you, you do not get one. What craziness!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Apple on April 13, 2010 at 11:26am

Obviously this is just anti-freedom people trying to flex their muscles. While not yet being able to outright ban a women's right, they can at least pass a law which requires the questioning of her sanity should she choose to excercise this choice. How patheticly low.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page