New in the News

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
ppfizenm

ppfizenm

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2010
Messages
1,872
Reaction score
12
Members do not see this ad.
Some news articles you may find interesting. I'm surprised the first one hasn't been discussed on here yet. There was a similar bill in texas last year that tried to force doctors to preform ultrasounds, have the woman hear the heart beat, and discuss every option before preforming an abortion. This bill would have forced doctors to preform trans-vaginal ultrasounds on women seeking abortions. You can look up the procedure but it is invasive to say the least. Highlighting trend of state governments trying to interfere with the doctor patient relationship?

Latest Anti-abortion law
http://www2.dailyprogress.com/news/2012/feb/26/transvaginal-ultrasound-unconstitutional-ar-1717639/

Possible new treatment for peripheral nerve damage
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/27/147344516/new-methods-could-speed-up-repair-of-injured-nerves

Creation of new eggs in females after development
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/02/27/147344258/study-suggests-way-to-create-new-eggs-in-women
 
More attempts by largely conservative men to assert control over people...this happened to us here in FL last year. It's ridiculous.
 
If an ultrasound is invasive, I would hate to be the person in charge of coming up with the adjective for abortion.
 
Last edited:
How can we make women feel any worse than they do about having an abortion? oh, we'll make then get an ultrasound.

Laws like this (written by stuffy old white men) seek only to punish women for sex. No you cannot get contraceptives, and, to boot, we'll make you feel absolutely horrible for wanting an abortion. I wonder: if men (myself included) were the ones who carried babies, would we be having this debate?

It's like the Scarlet Letter all over again!
 
Last edited:
jippyslim said:
How can we make women feel any worse than they do about having an abortion? oh, we'll make then get an ultrasound to make them see the great travesty they're doing.

Laws like this (written by stuffy old white men) seek only to punish women for sex. No you cannot get contraceptives, and, to boot, we'll make you feel absolutely horrible for wanting an abortion. I wonder: if men (myself included) were the ones who carried babies, would we be having this debate?

It's like the Scarlet Letter all over again!
Click to expand...

Oh, but not just a regular ultrasound! A transvaginal one!
 
I'm not sure that I have heard one woman (in the media ore otherwise) discuss the issue of transvaginal ultrasound for abortion. And it seems like a male doc is always the one interviewed about these things on tv. Do any woman's health issues get covered by women?
 
2012Aggie said:
If an ultrasound is invasive, I would hate to be the person in charge of coming up with the adjective for abortion.
Click to expand...

I think invasive is a good term for having an ultra sound wand inserted into a women's vagina against her will.
 
We're just a couple steps away from legalizing rape, aren't we? >.<
 
Transvaginal ultrasound is a modality commonly used to visualize a developing fetus is a true statement.

Extrapolating that fact to conclude that this modality would be forced on women considering abortion is disingenuous at best.

All pregnant women whether considering an abortion or not get an ultrasound (transabdominal/transvaginal, whatever) as part of standard care. It's kinda important to verify that the pregnancy is uterine vs. ectopic in any case.

As usual, another SDN thread on the topic of abortion all hysterical and not particularly factual.
 
The right Path said:
Transvaginal ultrasound is a modality commonly used to visualize a developing fetus is a true statement.

Extrapolating that fact to conclude that this modality would be forced on women considering abortion is disingenuous at best.

All pregnant women whether considering an abortion or not get an ultrasound (transabdominal/transvaginal, whatever) as part of standard care. It's kinda important to verify that the pregnancy is uterine vs. ectopic in any case.

As usual, another SDN thread on the topic of abortion all hysterical and not particularly factual.
Click to expand...
Is this another "I didn't read the article" post?
 
I think a couple points are different here. Obviously the ultrasound is needed. It isn't medically necessary for it to be a transvaginal ultrasound though. And trust me, having gotten one to get checked for endo, it is a very invasive and very uncomfortable procedure.

Second it will be required of anyone, including victims of rape or incest. Think about that. They are going to require a medically unnecessary and invasive procedure on people.

If it's done it should be decided by physicians based on medical necessity, not by politicians.

Regardless of where you stand on abortion, that's just ridiculous.
 
That's exactly my point. No one is going to force a woman to have a transvag US. The author of the article is making a big fuss out of a non issue. Just because it is common (likely offers better imaging), doesn't mean that it is necessary. The actual bill does not make any reference to US modality at all. The author is leaping to an unjustified conclusion. For political reasons, in my opinion.

In fact, the only point of the ultrasound is to get an accurate estimation of the gestational age which doesn't require a sharp image of all the fingers and toes.

The purpose of documenting the gestational age is because of the implications of risk to the mother and is therefore arguably a critical aspect of informed consent. The actual images obtained are not even the principle issue. The bill simply states that if the woman wishes, she may have a copy of them without charge.

The article is a red herring. And I'm calling it out as such. That is all.

Incidentally, I have had the transvag US done at about 10 wks of my second pregnancy. Yeah, it's awkward as is any pelvic exam. Personally I find the speculum and the cytobrush much more uncomfortable.
 
Last edited:
The right Path said:
Extrapolating that fact to conclude that this modality would be forced on women considering abortion is disingenuous at best.

All pregnant women whether considering an abortion or not get an ultrasound (transabdominal/transvaginal, whatever) as part of standard care. It's kinda important to verify that the pregnancy is uterine vs. ectopic in any case.
Click to expand...

That's not what I've understood this bill to entail. Since we're talking about first-trimester abortions, abdominal ultrasound isn't really an option for producing a viewable image of an 8-12 week fetus as required by the proposed bills/enacted laws. Moreover, they aren't medically necessary for an abortion and aren't required routinely. Other methods of determining gestational age are typically used in abortion cases.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMcp1103639

About 90% of all abortions in the United States are surgical procedures, most performed without US, and the provider visually confirms the abortion. Given that the rate of serious complications, including retained products of conception, is less than 1%, resolving whether aborted pregnancies are uterine vs. ectopic seems not to be the true motivation behind these bills. Even if useful to the physician, why show the image to the patient, really, if not to shame her into changing her mind?

Dahlia Lithwick put it best (though she didn't predict McDonnell's backdown):
http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl...orcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.html

The right Path said:
As usual, another SDN thread on the topic of abortion all hysterical and not particularly factual.
Click to expand...

Nice touch. 👎
 
The right Path said:
The purpose of documenting the gestational age is because of the implications of risk to the mother and is therefore arguably a critical aspect of informed consent. The actual images obtained are not even the principle issue. The bill simply states that if the woman wishes, she may have a copy of them without charge.
Click to expand...

Ohh, I see, the anti-choice folks are concerned about women's health, I get it now!
 
The right Path said:
That's exactly my point. No one is going to force a woman to have a transvag US. The author of the article is making a big fuss out of a non issue. Just because it is common (likely offers better imaging), doesn't mean that it is necessary. The actual bill does not make any reference to US modality at all. The author is leaping to an unjustified conclusion. For political reasons, in my opinion.

In fact, the only point of the ultrasound is to get an accurate estimation of the gestational age which doesn't require a sharp image of all the fingers and toes.

The purpose of documenting the gestational age is because of the implications of risk to the mother and is therefore arguably a critical aspect of informed consent. The actual images obtained are not even the principle issue. The bill simply states that if the woman wishes, she may have a copy of them without charge.

The article is a red herring. And I'm calling it out as such. That is all.

Incidentally, I have had the transvag US done at about 10 wks of my second pregnancy. Yeah, it's awkward as is any pelvic exam. Personally I find the speculum and the cytobrush much more uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

I don't understand what it is you find a red herring. The bill hasn't passed specifically because the outrage over the fact that in many cases it would require woman to receive a procedure that you, a willing patient, as awkward.

Proponents of the bill specifically stated that it was designed to show mothers a picture of their unborn child and hopefully persuade them to reconsider. I really don't think they are concerned with the health of the mother.

My motivation for posting this however was not to debate an issue that has already been defeated because people found it to be what you claimed it wasn't. It was to raise the issue of the government enlisting doctors as agents of the government to carry out their moral regulations interfering with the doctor/patient relationship.
 
ppfizenm said:
My motivation for posting this however was not to debate an issue that has already been defeated because people found it to be what you claimed it wasn't. It was to raise the issue of the government enlisting doctors as agents of the government to carry out their moral regulations interfering with the doctor/patient relationship.
Click to expand...


Well, the politicians can't let the insurance companies have all the fun of telling docs what they can and can't do with their patients....


🙄
 
ppfizenm said:
I don't understand what it is you find a red herring. The bill hasn't passed specifically because the outrage over the fact that in many cases it would require woman to receive a procedure that you, a willing patient, as awkward.

Proponents of the bill specifically stated that it was designed to show mothers a picture of their unborn child and hopefully persuade them to reconsider. I really don't think they are concerned with the health of the mother.

My motivation for posting this however was not to debate an issue that has already been defeated because people found it to be what you claimed it wasn't. It was to raise the issue of the government enlisting doctors as agents of the government to carry out their moral regulations interfering with the doctor/patient relationship.
Click to expand...
Where in the bill is the type of ultrasound specified? If it is in the bill linked above, I missed it.....
 
theseeker4 said:
Where in the bill is the type of ultrasound specified? If it is in the bill linked above, I missed it.....
Click to expand...

It requires a gestational age be taken prior to an abortion. In the early stages of development the transvaginal ultrasound is better at doing this.

"the ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable"

this is what the bill states. Early in development this is only realistic with a TVUS.
 
ppfizenm said:
It requires a gestational age be taken prior to an abortion. In the early stages of development the transvaginal ultrasound is better at doing this.

"the ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable"

this is what the bill states. Early in development this is only realistic with a TVUS.
Click to expand...
So it is still up to a doctor's discretion since the bill doesn't state anything like "the most efficient/accurate/precise/etc. means available must be used to determine xyz." At least I would find it hard to believe the bill as worded would ever be sufficient to get a doctor in legal trouble for not performing a TVUS......
 
theseeker4 said:
So it is still up to a doctor's discretion since the bill doesn't state anything like "the most efficient/accurate/precise/etc. means available must be used to determine xyz." At least I would find it hard to believe the bill as worded would ever be sufficient to get a doctor in legal trouble for not performing a TVUS......
Click to expand...

Before the Virginia House passed House Bill 462, the following common-sense amendment was introduced that would waive the ultrasound requirement if consent could not be obtained for a necessary transvaginal ultrasound. The amendment failed, and the provision never made it into the bill*.

"The qualified medical professional performing fetal ultrasound imaging . . . shall not perform an ultrasound requiring vaginal penetration without the prior written consent of the pregnant woman. If the qualified medical professional performing the fetal ultrasound imaging . . . determines that a fetal ultrasound image can only be obtained with an ultrasound requiring vaginal penetration and the pregnant woman declines to provide written consent to an ultrasound requiring vaginal penetration, then the provisions of this section related to performance of fetal ultrasound imaging shall not apply and fetal ultrasound imaging for the purpose of determining fetal age shall not be required."
 
Last edited:
The right Path said:
Transvaginal ultrasound is a modality commonly used to visualize a developing fetus is a true statement.

Extrapolating that fact to conclude that this modality would be forced on women considering abortion is disingenuous at best.

All pregnant women whether considering an abortion or not get an ultrasound (transabdominal/transvaginal, whatever) as part of standard care. It's kinda important to verify that the pregnancy is uterine vs. ectopic in any case.

As usual, another SDN thread on the topic of abortion all hysterical and not particularly factual.
Click to expand...

What? 😕
Do you know anything about the issue? It's amazing how the day after Jon Stewart did a segment on the issue that the Gov. of Virgina had the legislature REMOVE the mandatory ultrasound from the bill. That's the kind of issue that will energize NOVA, and when NOVA is energized, Republicans lose elections. :laugh:
 
theseeker4 said:
So it is still up to a doctor's discretion since the bill doesn't state anything like "the most efficient/accurate/precise/etc. means available must be used to determine xyz." At least I would find it hard to believe the bill as worded would ever be sufficient to get a doctor in legal trouble for not performing a TVUS......
Click to expand...

At that young gestational age I believe the TVUS is the only way to get exactly what the bill required.

http://www.acog.org/About_ACOG/ACOG_Sections/Virginia_Section/Urgent_Call_to_Action

A letter to Virginia OB/GYNs from the american college of OB/GYNs. Helps put this into context from the physicians point of view and points out that the TVUS was part of the bill.
 
ppfizenm said:
At that young gestational age I believe the TVUS is the only way to get exactly what the bill required.
Click to expand...
OK, based on other comments and the text of the bill itself, I wasn't sure if the TVUS was actually required by the bill or if it was being used to increase outrage.

On a related note, didn't the governor recently withdraw support for any bill that would require TVUS, due to the outcry over it?
 
North12 said:
Good to know that it was dropped- thanks.

I thought this was a very interesting article for people interested in missions/ international health policy:

http://www.msfaccess.org/resources/press-releases/1767
Click to expand...

"Novartis first sued the Indian government in 2006, after a patent the company was seeking for the cancer drug imatinib mesylate was rejected. India grants product patents in line with international trade rules since 2005, but in the interest of public health, India’s law is strict about what does and does not deserve a patent. Patents are not granted on modifications of drugs that already exist. Because Imatinib mesylate was the salt form of imatinib, the original invention behind the cancer drug, it was not granted a patent."

I'm sure the mesylate slightly changes its bioavailability, but really? Seriously?
 
eHombre said:
"Novartis first sued the Indian government in 2006, after a patent the company was seeking for the cancer drug imatinib mesylate was rejected. India grants product patents in line with international trade rules since 2005, but in the interest of public health, India’s law is strict about what does and does not deserve a patent. Patents are not granted on modifications of drugs that already exist. Because Imatinib mesylate was the salt form of imatinib, the original invention behind the cancer drug, it was not granted a patent."

I'm sure the mesylate slightly changes its bioavailability, but really? Seriously?
Click to expand...

Companies can get patents sometimes just by changing the filler in the pill. One company changed a filler to sodium bicarbonate in a stomach drug and got an extension on the life of the patent. Grant it sodium bicarbonate reduces neutralizes stomach acid but this is known in prior art. The examiner was an idiot for giving that one out.
 
Look- here are the points I've tried to make. I'm not getting into an abortion morality war.

I didn't see any form of the bill that even suggested that transvag US should be used. Please link if this is incorrect. Just because transvag US is technically a "better" modality in early pregnancy doesn't mean that the bill is assuming that it must be used rather than transabdominal.

Someone even quoted an amendment that specified that transvag US was not to be required.

So bottom line is- no one is trying to pass a bill that forces a doctor to perform any invasive diagnostic test. I would agree that such a mandate would be completely unethical and outrageous.

Someone brought up that this bill is being specifically used as a tool to dissuade women from having an abortion. Apart from pointing out that no one is forced to look at the images and (as already stated) viewing the images doesn't change outcomes, all I can say is that it appears that wackadoos from both sides are trying to manipulate this bill for their own agendas.

If you want to engage in a legitimate discussion of this bill, the real issue is whether or not determining/documenting gestational age is a necessary component of informed consent for this procedure.

However, if you just like to get all uppity over non-issues, flame away.
 
ppfizenm said:
At that young gestational age I believe the TVUS is the only way to get exactly what the bill required.

http://www.acog.org/About_ACOG/ACOG_Sections/Virginia_Section/Urgent_Call_to_Action

A letter to Virginia OB/GYNs from the american college of OB/GYNs. Helps put this into context from the physicians point of view and points out that the TVUS was part of the bill.
Click to expand...

No, transvag US is not the only way to determine gestational age. And I'd rather read from the primary source exactly where the bill says that transvag is mandatory.
 
Breaking news on the thread topic:

"the most pointed rhetoric came when the Senate's only doctor, Sen. Ralph Northam, told his 39 non-physician colleagues they were unethically intruding into an area they don't comprehend for political and ideological ends.

"That's telling me and my colleagues how to practice medicine," said Northam, D-Norfolk, a pediatric neurologist who noted his years of undergraduate college education, four years of medical school and six years of training in his specialty. At one point, Northam was debating his point with the bill's chief Senate advocate, Sen. Steve Martin, R-Chesterfield, who holds no college degree.


He said the external abdominal ultrasound, particularly in the early stages of pregnancy is meaningless, but doctors will be compelled by law to perform them. "I might as well put the ultrasound against this bottle of Gatorade for all the good it would do," he said. "This was a tremendous assault on women's health and a tremendous insult on the medical profession."
Click to expand...


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ne...enate_passes_ultrasound_abortion_mandate.html
 
The right Path said:
No, transvag US is not the only way to determine gestational age. And I'd rather read from the primary source exactly where the bill says that transvag is mandatory.
Click to expand...

we aren't only talking about gestational age. keep up
 
The right Path said:
Oh really? What other purpose is this ultrasound intended for (according to the bill)?
Click to expand...

to make women feel uncomfortable.

It stipulated measurements of external and internal features needed to be taken.
 
ppfizenm said:
to make women feel uncomfortable.

It stipulated measurements of external and internal features needed to be taken.
Click to expand...

The ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable. Determination of gestational age shall be based upon measurement of the fetus in a manner consistent with standard medical practice in the community in determining gestational age. When only the gestational sac is visible during ultrasound imaging, gestational age may be based upon measurement of the gestational sac. A print of the ultrasound image shall be made to document the measurements that have been taken to determine the gestational age of the fetus.

Taken directly from the text of the bill.

Here's the last thing I'm gonna say on this topic and then I'm done, cuz this is getting to be a waste of my time.

If you want to take the position that gestational age isn't an important aspect of informed consent, fine. If you want to take the position that the government has no business getting involved in medical practice standards, I totally get that. If you want to take the position that this bill is a waste of time and money, I just might agree.

However, I'm just not hearing that if this bill passes that women in Virginia are going to be subjected to a medical probe forced into their vaginas by coerced government agents (aka doctors) and then be forced to look at the ultrasound images in order to be guilted into not having an abortion. That may be the wish of some whackjobs, but that is clearly not supported by what the bill actually says.
 
The right Path said:
The ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable. Determination of gestational age shall be based upon measurement of the fetus in a manner consistent with standard medical practice in the community in determining gestational age. When only the gestational sac is visible during ultrasound imaging, gestational age may be based upon measurement of the gestational sac. A print of the ultrasound image shall be made to document the measurements that have been taken to determine the gestational age of the fetus.

Taken directly from the text of the bill.

Here's the last thing I'm gonna say on this topic and then I'm done, cuz this is getting to be a waste of my time.

If you want to take the position that gestational age isn't an important aspect of informed consent, fine. If you want to take the position that the government has no business getting involved in medical practice standards, I totally get that. If you want to take the position that this bill is a waste of time and money, I just might agree.

However, I'm just not hearing that if this bill passes that women in Virginia are going to be subjected to a medical probe forced into their vaginas by coerced government agents (aka doctors) and then be forced to look at the ultrasound images in order to be guilted into not having an abortion. That may be the wish of some whackjobs, but that is clearly not supported by what the bill actually says.
Click to expand...
You realize the bill was altered from its original version after the governor of VA admitted to not reading the full bill the first time? Transvaginal was removed the second go around because of an outcry from the community.
 
This bill is gross. People who seriously have this view are people I roll my eyes at and laugh at hysterically for being so weird.....
 
The right Path said:
The ultrasound image shall be made pursuant to standard medical practice in the community, contain the dimensions of the fetus, and accurately portray the presence of external members and internal organs of the fetus, if present or viewable. Determination of gestational age shall be based upon measurement of the fetus in a manner consistent with standard medical practice in the community in determining gestational age. When only the gestational sac is visible during ultrasound imaging, gestational age may be based upon measurement of the gestational sac. A print of the ultrasound image shall be made to document the measurements that have been taken to determine the gestational age of the fetus.

Taken directly from the text of the bill.

Here's the last thing I'm gonna say on this topic and then I'm done, cuz this is getting to be a waste of my time.

If you want to take the position that gestational age isn't an important aspect of informed consent, fine. If you want to take the position that the government has no business getting involved in medical practice standards, I totally get that. If you want to take the position that this bill is a waste of time and money, I just might agree.

However, I'm just not hearing that if this bill passes that women in Virginia are going to be subjected to a medical probe forced into their vaginas by coerced government agents (aka doctors) and then be forced to look at the ultrasound images in order to be guilted into not having an abortion. That may be the wish of some whackjobs, but that is clearly not supported by what the bill actually says.
Click to expand...

Different language than the original.

When the American college of OB/GYN's recognizes that this will force doctors to preform TVUS on patients seeking abortion I think you need to defer to their knowledge over your own opinion on the situation.

Also, in Pennsylvania coming up there will be a vote on a similar bill that stipulates an internal ultra sound.
 
ppfizenm said:
Different language than the original.

When the American college of OB/GYN's recognizes that this will force doctors to preform TVUS on patients seeking abortion I think you need to defer to their knowledge over your own opinion on the situation.

Also, in Pennsylvania coming up there will be a vote on a similar bill that stipulates an internal ultra sound.
Click to expand...
I'm from Pennsylvania. The legislator who proposed an U/S bill (which doesn't mention transvaginal) lives in a county I never heard of. I had to wikipedia it. Turns out the same county has no traffic lights (random).

Oh Pennsylvania.
 
Bacchus said:
I'm from Pennsylvania. The legislator who proposed an U/S bill (which doesn't mention transvaginal) lives in a county I never heard of. I had to wikipedia it. Turns out the same county has no traffic lights (random).

Oh Pennsylvania.
Click to expand...

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2011&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=1077&pn=2511

I'm only about halfway through the bill at the moment though it sounds like to determine everything the bill requires a TVUS would be necessary.

Even if it isn't this bill mandates that the mother receive a picture of the fetus. That she must take a picture of the fetus to the abortion for the patient file. That the screen be directed at the mother during the US so she can see the baby in real time, though she is free not to look. the list goes on.
 
The right Path said:
Transvaginal ultrasound is a modality commonly used to visualize a developing fetus is a true statement.

Extrapolating that fact to conclude that this modality would be forced on women considering abortion is disingenuous at best.

All pregnant women whether considering an abortion or not get an ultrasound (transabdominal/transvaginal, whatever) as part of standard care. It's kinda important to verify that the pregnancy is uterine vs. ectopic in any case.

As usual, another SDN thread on the topic of abortion all hysterical and not particularly factual.[/QUOTE]

Is there a liberal ranting SDN thread that is?

And heaven forbid pregnant women receive you know, healthcare- a diagnostic test so an appropriate informed decision can be made between the provider and patient. 🙄

And :laugh: at the comments about govt intrusion on reproductive health. I doubt none of you are aware or remember that Clinton tried to force foreign stationed military providers to provide abortion on demand whether they (the doctors) morally objected to or not; though after public outrage he backed off. Im sure no thread would have been started here complaining of that.
Click to expand...
 
sirenomelia said:
The right Path said:
Transvaginal ultrasound is a modality commonly used to visualize a developing fetus is a true statement.

Extrapolating that fact to conclude that this modality would be forced on women considering abortion is disingenuous at best.

All pregnant women whether considering an abortion or not get an ultrasound (transabdominal/transvaginal, whatever) as part of standard care. It's kinda important to verify that the pregnancy is uterine vs. ectopic in any case.

As usual, another SDN thread on the topic of abortion all hysterical and not particularly factual.[/QUOTE]

Is there a liberal ranting SDN thread that is?

And heaven forbid pregnant women receive you know, healthcare- a diagnostic test so an appropriate informed decision can be made between the provider and patient. 🙄

And :laugh: at the comments about govt intrusion on reproductive health. I doubt none of you are aware or remember that Clinton tried to force foreign stationed military providers to provide abortion on demand whether they (the doctors) morally objected to or not; though after public outrage he backed off. Im sure no thread would have been started here complaining of that.
Click to expand...

I can see the benefits to both sides of these bills. For Clinton's it would be that receiving an abortion abroad would be difficult and not many doctors are available on bases to do such a procedure. Both have risks though. I don't think ultimately any will pass but it is interesting to talk about the reasons why these bills are put up for vote and what they would mean for us should they pass.
Click to expand...
 
sirenomelia said:
And heaven forbid pregnant women receive you know, healthcare- a diagnostic test so an appropriate informed decision can be made between the provider and patient. 🙄

And :laugh: at the comments about govt intrusion on reproductive health. I doubt none of you are aware or remember that Clinton tried to force foreign stationed military providers to provide abortion on demand whether they (the doctors) morally objected to or not; though after public outrage he backed off. Im sure no thread would have been started here complaining of that.
Click to expand...

You aren't opposed to the government dictating to physicians what they have to do? Or you're just opposed to it when it's proposed by a political party other than your own?

I don't care what the issue is, any time the lawyers, economists, and otherwise completely-devoid-of-meaningful-skills-and-life-experience politicians start dictating medical practice, they need to be stopped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

biscuit28
New LOR at this point in the cycle
Replies
2
Views
714
biscuit28
biscuit28
jakewagmin
Should I address the dip in my GPA?
Replies
6
Views
638
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
P
Extracurricular hours in the context of gap years
Replies
2
Views
420
LunaOri
LunaOri
R
  • Question Question
Extracurricular in the summer I take the MCAT?
Replies
3
Views
974
dramaqueenforlife
dramaqueenforlife
FutureMD2025
Wake Forest University - new medical school in Charlotte
Replies
7
Views
3K
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
Top