Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
Yes, I would say that's it....although I'm sure it will be explained as "we need to make sure there aren't any lesions in the uterus that would make the procedure harmful" or some such bullshit.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby
Not to mention exerting power over the woman, making the procedure more uncomfortable and painful, and all-around punishing her for being such a dirty whore that she got pregnant in the first place.
|
When the ultrasounds are required, most laws (not sure about the Ohio one) also state that the pictures have to be shown to the woman. There is no medical reason for a woman to view those images. Attempting coercion is the only reason to do that.
From this article:
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stor...-abortion.html
State Rep. Ron Hood, an Ashville Republican, defended his ultrasound proposal during hearings.
“Ultrasounds not only make life visible inside the womb, but unveil the truth of the unborn child’s humanity and connect the mother with her unborn child,” he said.
That article also describes the problem with the transfer of a patient with complications.
"Some clinics that provide abortions could be forced to close because of a new transfer requirement that forbids publicly funded hospitals from signing agreements to take patients from clinics. Those agreements are required before the Ohio Department of Health grants an abortion clinic permission to operate."
So that's a Catch 22, right? Perhaps it is because I'm from Detroit, where 911 is already way to slow with documented cases of people dying while waiting for them to show up 45 minutes later, but I don't think a 911 emergency system should be used for a routine transfer between two medical facilities. I was transferred from a freestanding ER to a hospital for admission, by ambulance, on Monday. These are routine types of transfers, not emergencies per se.
Threaded Mode
