Quote:
Originally Posted by honeychile
Not a stupid question at all. I've been told of two women (who my mother knew) who had illegal abortions, and one of them was pregnant with twins. One twin was aborted, and the second twin "miscarried" later that night - much to the woman's surprise.
These were both in the 1950's, so I would imagine it would be really hard for this to happen with today's technology.
IMHO, any ultraconservative doctor who claims to give abortions has to be a bigger nutjob than pro-choice people think of other ultraconservatives. If you don't believe in abortion, don't masquerade as an abortionist!
|
I could see in 1950's where there was no ultrasound techology only X-ray to localize the presence of fetuses.
But now, they have these piezo-tropic crystal, near MRI type, linear transducers for ultrasound, they can "see thru" the chair or board with these things--in this country.
And an ultrasound is done after a urine pregancy test, which is the SOP...
I dunno, but it is misleading to younger women who choose not the keep their pregnancies. I wish I could remember what year--1/2 years ago--that JAMA article. I have been unable to do a search...
I do know there was some NY Times article last year on "these groups" setting up shops with these high-end ultrasound machines some that folks can recreate their baby's image in 3-D.
Visual Sonics is the high-end ultrasound. We will be doing it for the heart.
IMO it's kind of messed up for the woman to be suing..
Hybrid Mode
