No reason for abortion?

[Jayhawker Soule]

The only folks who should be outraged are those who are female or have female relatives or friends.

So you recommend doing away with empathy?

Seriously?

 

[Left Coast]

I've seen proposals that do not. And, clearly, Malta does not have that exception.

I can't speak to the laws in Malta, mainly just what I've seen in the States.

Obviously any society without such exceptions (and I think abortions should be legal in many other cases as well) is deeply cruel and inhumane IMO.

 

[Left Coast]

Of course any state will have its own language. This is an excerpt of what I meant:

Abortion restrictions are now more likely to contain extremely narrow exemptions to save the lives of pregnant people, severe criminal penalties for providers and to lack exemptions for rape and incest.

That puts doctors in the position of trying to interpret legislation that is often extremely narrow. In one recent example, an Oklahoma abortion ban makes performing an abortion a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. In addition, medical exemptions for the procedure are exceedingly narrow.

An abortion can be legally performed only in the event the medical emergency “cannot be remedied by the delivery of the child”. “Medical emergency” is strictly defined as when a threat to a person’s life “by a physical disorder, physical illness or physical injury including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself”.​

‘A severe chilling effect’: abortion bans will inhibit doctors’ advice to patients, experts fear

There may be language of exceptions, but if the language is narrow and doctors may be prosecuted even if later found not guilty it is a risk they don't want to take. We see the far right is not very tolerant or reasonable in how they approach the abortion issue. Do doctors have a reason to trust the far right if they do reasonable medical tasks the far right thinks is immoral?

The chilling effect of abortion bans is certainly a legitimate concern. However, the tiny percentage of abortions performed due to medical emergencies are unlikely to be targeted for legal action. Doctors assess medical conditions and determine whether they are emergent/life-threatening all the time.

Legal action would be much more likely in other circumstances, especially if medical offices give patient advice on how to access abortions outside the state, etc.

 

[Heyo]

So you recommend doing away with empathy?

Woooosh

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

You responded to, "The only folks who should be outraged are those who are female or have female relatives or friends." I thought that he was being sarcastic. Didn't he just name everybody?

Oops, I think you're right. Bad (or hasty) reading on my part.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Seriously?

I apologize, I may have read your thought incorrectly.

 

[Revoltingest]

So you recommend doing away with empathy?

Empathy should be kept in moderation...for those who have it.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

but your forgetting the arguments of slipperyslopeism. As long as there is someone to argue that 'if someone can do x, then they can do xyzy,' we will have a problem. Because reality cannot possibly be that complicated and nuanced.

 

[F1fan]

The chilling effect of abortion bans is certainly a legitimate concern. However, the tiny percentage of abortions performed due to medical emergencies are unlikely to be targeted for legal action. Doctors assess medical conditions and determine whether they are emergent/life-threatening all the time.

Legal action would be much more likely in other circumstances, especially if medical offices give patient advice on how to access abortions outside the state, etc.

It's easy for we non-doctors to speculate about how actual doctors react to these laws, especially when they face serious threats for even necessary procedures. We can afford to look at these topics abstractly and causally. But you put yourself in their shoes. If you were a doctor, with a job and family, and you have reason to distrust the far right who are in positions of legal authority and may decide your judgment and treatment violated the law, and you face indictment. That means arrest. That means you'd likely lose your job. That means you'd have to hire a lawyer and looking at $100K in legal fees, and the time spent in court. Would you want to face that in your life?

That fear is what some doctors are expressing. And they are compromising care for patients because they fear the far right in authority.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Current Indian rules about Medical Termination of Pregnancy:

The gestation period upper limit for terminating a pregnancy with 1 doctor's opinion has been extended from 12 weeks to 20 weeks, with the rule being expanded to include unmarried women as well.

The gestation period upper limit for termination of pregnancy with 2 doctors' opinion has been extended from 20 weeks to 24 weeks, for the following special categories:

survivors of sexual assault or rape or incest
minors
change of marital status during the pregnancy (widowhood and divorce)
women with physical disabilities
mentally ill women
the fetal anomalies that have substantial risk of being incompatible with life or if the child is born it may suffer from such physical or mental abnormalities to be seriously handicapped
women with pregnancy in humanitarian settings or disaster or emergency​

A state-level Medical Board will determine the request for termination of a pregnancy longer than 24 weeks in the cases of fetal anomalies.
Abortion in India - Wikipedia

Do we need any changes?

 

[Shaul]

So you wholeheartedly accept the premise that only an abortion can save the woman but summarily reject the possibility that anti-abortion laws have exceptions for such cases.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So you wholeheartedly accept the premise that only an abortion can save the woman but summarily reject the possibility that anti-abortion laws have exceptions for such cases.

You have not been paying attention. That was in another country where even those protections are gone.

 

[Shaul]

You have not been paying attention. That was in another country where even those protections are gone.

I knew that. But this was posted in the North American forum and the woman is a US citizen. Therefore the discussion is not limited to Maltese law alone.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I knew that. But this was posted in the North American forum and the woman is a US citizen. Therefore the discussion is not limited to Maltese law alone.

I agree. an American citizen has lost some of her rights and now her life is threatened. Not too far from what the anti-abortionists in the US seem to want.

 

[Left Coast]

It's easy for we non-doctors to speculate about how actual doctors react to these laws, especially when they face serious threats for even necessary procedures. We can afford to look at these topics abstractly and causally. But you put yourself in their shoes. If you were a doctor, with a job and family, and you have reason to distrust the far right who are in positions of legal authority and may decide your judgment and treatment violated the law, and you face indictment. That means arrest. That means you'd likely lose your job. That means you'd have to hire a lawyer and looking at $100K in legal fees, and the time spent in court. Would you want to face that in your life?

That fear is what some doctors are expressing. And they are compromising care for patients because they fear the far right in authority.

I'm not a doctor but I do work in healthcare and alongside doctors and other providers daily for several years. So I have a reasonable, professionally informed window into how they think and how healthcare systems operate in the US. So again, the tiny percentage of abortions done under life saving emergency circumstances are going to keep happening. There is no appetite on the American right to prosecute doctors for these kinds of situations.