Oklahoma passes newer strict abortion laws

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'm fairly close to the Oklahoma legislature. Lots of friends work in and around that body. I'm less than a mile away from the state capitol building as I type this. I can tell you with certainty that most Oklahoma legislators are complete morons. It's embarrassing.

For whatever reason this made me laugh really hard.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by agzg

For whatever reason this made me laugh really hard.

It made me laugh and

[aephi alum]

Can I just tell you how glad I am that I don't live in Oklahoma???

There is also no exemption for rape victims. Oh, you were raped and you got pregnant as a result and you want to abort? Too bad, you'll still have to get an ultrasound (likely a transvag) and sit through a lecture on how your "baby" is sooo beautiful. It must feel like being raped all over again.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by aephi alum

Can I just tell you how glad I am that I don't live in Oklahoma???

There is also no exemption for rape victims. Oh, you were raped and you got pregnant as a result and you want to abort? Too bad, you'll still have to get an ultrasound (likely a transvag) and sit through a lecture on how your "baby" is sooo beautiful. It must feel like being raped all over again.

No kidding. Like at 6 weeks are they going to point out the tail? Is that considered a limb?

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

The second measure passed into law Tuesday protects doctors from malpractice suits if they decide not to inform the parents of a unborn baby that the fetus has birth defects. The intent of the bill is to prevent parents from later suing doctors who withhold information to try to influence them against having an abortion.

Wait wait wait. So is this just for women considering abortion or for all women? Because that sounds like any dcotr who finds that a fetus has a birth defect doesn't have to tell ANY expecting parent---which sounds dumb as hell in my head and I really need someone to confirm that that's what I just read. I'm not even commenting on the rest until I can wrap my mind around that.

[VandalSquirrel]

Originally Posted by aephi alum

Can I just tell you how glad I am that I don't live in Oklahoma???

There is also no exemption for rape victims. Oh, you were raped and you got pregnant as a result and you want to abort? Too bad, you'll still have to get an ultrasound (likely a transvag) and sit through a lecture on how your "baby" is sooo beautiful. It must feel like being raped all over again.

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

This is the first thing I thought of when I heard of the new laws.

Originally Posted by christiangirl

Wait wait wait. So is this just for women considering abortion or for all women? Because that sounds like any dcotr who finds that a fetus has a birth defect doesn't have to tell ANY expecting parent---which sounds dumb as hell in my head and I really need someone to confirm that that's what I just read. I'm not even commenting on the rest until I can wrap my mind around that.

Yes, one can get raped by a family member, hear all about their baby, and not even be told if there are any potential birth defects that may arise because the sperm came from someone they share a lot of DNA with, awesome.

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by VandalSquirrel

Yes, one can get raped by a family member, hear all about their baby, and not even be told if there are any potential birth defects that may arise because the sperm came from someone they share a lot of DNA with, awesome.

Ooooh okay so it's just for women who are going through the ultrasound/testing for an abortion? I understand. Yes, that's still dumb as IDKW but not on as wide-spread of a scale as I was thinking. I thought the law was for all expecting women who are seeing an OBGYN for a prenatal check-up (that a doc is clear to NEVER reveal birth defects so a woman who finds her baby isn't as healthy as she thought won't then decide to abort). Still, that's seriously messed up.

ETA: As far as law #1, I see both sides to it. I see that the gov't is trying to make women understand the gravity of the decision they're about to make, but it's a solid argument that it's not the gov't's place to "make" women understand anything. That can be seen as overstepping a line and can further traumatize an already traumatized woman/girl. I say "can be seen" because there are undoubtedly people who see it as just the opposite--there had to be for this darn thing to have passed.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by christiangirl

Wait wait wait. So is this just for women considering abortion or for all women? Because that sounds like any dcotr who finds that a fetus has a birth defect doesn't have to tell ANY expecting parent---which sounds dumb as hell in my head and I really need someone to confirm that that's what I just read. I'm not even commenting on the rest until I can wrap my mind around that.

That's the way I read it, too!

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by christiangirl

Wait wait wait. So is this just for women considering abortion or for all women? Because that sounds like any dcotr who finds that a fetus has a birth defect doesn't have to tell ANY expecting parent---which sounds dumb as hell in my head and I really need someone to confirm that that's what I just read. I'm not even commenting on the rest until I can wrap my mind around that.

It is saying that the doctor does not have to inform you if he thinks your baby has birth defects period. The intent is to keep people from aborting babies who are severely deformed. A doctor wouldn't know whether parents might choose to abort if they know that their baby is going to be so severely deformed that it cannot live more than a few hours after birth or require lifetime institutionalization, etc. Is the next step to exempt a doctor if they choose not to tell you that your own life is in danger if the pregnancy continues???

As for the checklist, I think I'd check "Other" with "None of your business" (perhaps with an expletive too!) if given that form.

As for whether there is a separate human being involved, that is the part that is up to debate and that will always be a big difference between pro-lifers and pro-choicers. Some of us do not believe it is a separate human being until it can survive on its own without the host. The question of when life begins (along with religion) is the real root of this debate, always and nobody has a real, definitive answer.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AGDee

It is saying that the doctor does not have to inform you if he thinks your baby has birth defects period. The intent is to keep people from aborting babies who are severely deformed. A doctor wouldn't know whether parents might choose to abort if they know that their baby is going to be so severely deformed that it cannot live more than a few hours after birth or require lifetime institutionalization, etc. Is the next step to exempt a doctor if they choose not to tell you that your own life is in danger if the pregnancy continues???

Like most of this bill, this part is unconstitutional. The Oklahoma Constitution, believe it or not, is pretty progressive. These sorts of immunity statutes have been disposed with in the past and this one ought to be no different. The Oklahoma Constitution requires that for every wrong there shall be a remedy.

This particular statute is to prevent wrongful birth suits and the above is one such fact patter which would ordinarily lead to these sorts of suits.

As for the checklist, I think I'd check "Other" with "None of your business" (perhaps with an expletive too!) if given that form.

This is maybe the one area where I don't see a problem with the bill. Nothing is personally identifiable. It could still be found that the purpose of this survey is intimidation and that'd probably be an undue burden situation. Or how about if the mother was unable to fill out the form because she had been raped and beaten into a coma and was now pregnant? Maybe the lack of a health of the mother exception is fatal here as well?

As for whether there is a separate human being involved, that is the part that is up to debate and that will always be a big difference between pro-lifers and pro-choicers. Some of us do not believe it is a separate human being until it can survive on its own without the host. The question of when life begins (along with religion) is the real root of this debate, always and nobody has a real, definitive answer.

At the point of viability, according to present law, the state has a compelling interest in protecting the life of the child. As long as there's some health of the mother exception, prohibitions past week 20 or so on abortion could theoretically be permissible.

It's fairly likely ALL of these things will be struck down though. And in that event, this highly conservative, right of right legislature is simply funneling money (attorneys fees) into the coffers of the ACLU and other pro-choice legal consortiums. I'm sure these groups appreciate Oklahoma's efforts because like most non-profits, their donations are probably down because of the economy.

ETA: Just heard the District Judge assigned to the case is my cousin. She's a fair judge, will not be swayed by politics. Hella smart lady too. She'll make the right call.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by aephi alum

There is also no exemption for rape victims.

This is the first thing I thought of when I heard of the new laws.