Pennsylvania mother who gave daughter abortion pill gets prison

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

You've performed a surgical abortion.

Yet you don't support LOCAL women's clinics, offering immediate and low cost care ---- and medical abortion.

You're all in favor of this woman having to drive 74 mikes one way, 3 to 4 times --- by PA law.

You are part of the problem. Not part of the solution.

I make it a point NOT to believe every claim made by internet posters, especially those who claim to have done everything and know everything about everything.

These are the same kinds of people who persistently bully and personally insult those that don't present the "proper" attitude for their agenda". These are the people who hide behind that "gentle" counselor outside women's clinics, whose spitting free speech is more valuable than a woman' s right to privacy.

Even though the AMA and the ACOG agree these restriction are not necessary, and the abortion pill should NOT be classified as surgical abortion, these anti-choicers still argue that closing clinic that don't meet new stricter surgical criteria is for health and safety, while insulting, imprisoning and bullying women who still have the nerve to get caught between a rock and a hard place.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

You've performed a surgical abortion.

Yet you don't support LOCAL women's clinics, offering immediate and low cost care ---- and medical abortion.

You're all in favor of this woman having to drive 74 mikes one way, 3 to 4 times --- by PA law.

You are part of the problem. Not part of the solution.

I make it a point NOT to believe every claim made by internet posters, especially those who claim to have done everything and know everything about everything.

These are the same kinds of people who persistently bully and personally insult those that don't present the "proper" attitude for their agenda". These are the people who hide behind that "gentle" counselor outside women's clinics, whose spitting free speech is more valuable than a woman' s right to privacy.

Even though the AMA and the ACOG agree these restriction are not necessary, and the abortion pill should NOT be classified as surgical abortion, these anti-choicers still argue that closing clinic that don't meet new stricter surgical criteria is for health and safety, while insulting, imprisoning and bullying women who still have the nerve to get caught between a rock and a hard place.

But that's not what I said and to present that in that manner is dishonest. What I said is that every medical clinic needs to have the same standards of every other medical clinic.

The AMA did not say this and you still have to provide proof of that, so you are being (yet again) dishonest about that.

ACOG said, in essence, that they would just dump their complications on the local ER. Do you find that "standard" ethical? Is there any other professional surgical organization that uses the "we'll just dump our complications on the local ER" standard?

I love leftists who think that doctors are just money grubbing shills who cut corners for profit--UNLESS abortion is involved then it's screw the professional standards.

It is easy to see why. The standards that every other surgical subspecialty has to comply with cuts into profit. Fine, if you don't want abortion clinics to have to maintain a certain level of care, have at it---but let the rest of the clinics and surgical subspecialties do the exact same thing. Hypocrisy is expecting one standard from one group but not from another group.

a reply to: windword

Claims that clinics and their personnel don't have high standard is ridiculous.

We know about TRAP LAWS, in part because the arrogant Religious Right brag about it.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: windword

Claims that clinics and their personnel don't have high standard is ridiculous.

We know about TRAP LAWS, in part because the arrogant Religious Right brag about it.

Didn't say NO standards. Said the same standards for the same level of procedures. The left is so irrational.

a reply to: NavyDoc

The AMA did not say this and you still have to provide proof of that, so you are being (yet again) dishonest about that.

Yes they did, and Yes I have. But, I'll post it again.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) filed a joint amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in support of Planned Parenthood’s challenge to Texas House Bill (HB) 2. ACOG and the AMA oppose HB 2 because it imposes government regulation on abortion care that jeopardizes the health of women in Texas and denies them access to the safest and most effective evidence-based protocols for medical abortions.

Abortion is a very safe procedure, and complications requiring hospital admission are extremely rare. There is no medical basis to require abortion providers to have local hospital admitting privileges. Emergency room physicians, hospital-based physicians, and on-call specialists already provide prompt and effective treatment to all patients with urgent medical needs, including women with abortion-related complications.

ACOG also opposes Texas HB 2’s requirement that physicians follow an inferior treatment protocol for medical abortions. Legislators should not block advances in medical care by prohibiting physicians from incorporating the best, and most current, scientific evidence into their patient care. Requiring physicians to follow a protocol that is scientifically proven to be inferior to other regimens is an unwarranted intrusion in the physician-patient relationship.
www.acog.org...

ACOG said, in essence, that they would just dump their complications on the local ER.

Prove it. Citation please.

originally posted by: Iamthatbish
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

We get get it, you disagree with this womans choice.

That does not make her wrong. In fact the people that are wrong are those imposing their values on others.

that includes you just because you keep typing it doesn't make you right. Would you like to add anything new?

I am not imposing values.. what are you talking about? I support the right for her daughter to have an abortion. It has nothing to do with values, it's ethics, and it is ethically wrong to give your child dangerous and illegal drugs to cause a back alley illegal abortion. It's the modern equivalent of the coat hanger. She had a legal option available, instead she chose a dangerous illegal route and because of that her daughter ended up in the emergency room and the mother facing criminal charges.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: Annee

That's great advice Annee. Except I break about a third of them. What are my other options?

Statistics on condoms breaking do not agree with you.

Statistics don't agree with him? In what way? Every guy knows they break VERY often.

a reply to: windword
Isn't it interesting.

A military doc judging quality of care by physical facility.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: windword
Isn't it interesting.

A military doc judging quality of care by physical facility.

Standards are standards in the US throughout. Ignorant as usual. Military facilities go through the same JHACO inspections as every other institution in the US.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

The AMA did not say this and you still have to provide proof of that, so you are being (yet again) dishonest about that.

Yes they did, and Yes I have. But, I'll post it again.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) filed a joint amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in support of Planned Parenthood’s challenge to Texas House Bill (HB) 2. ACOG and the AMA oppose HB 2 because it imposes government regulation on abortion care that jeopardizes the health of women in Texas and denies them access to the safest and most effective evidence-based protocols for medical abortions.

Abortion is a very safe procedure, and complications requiring hospital admission are extremely rare. There is no medical basis to require abortion providers to have local hospital admitting privileges. Emergency room physicians, hospital-based physicians, and on-call specialists already provide prompt and effective treatment to all patients with urgent medical needs, including women with abortion-related complications.

ACOG also opposes Texas HB 2’s requirement that physicians follow an inferior treatment protocol for medical abortions. Legislators should not block advances in medical care by prohibiting physicians from incorporating the best, and most current, scientific evidence into their patient care. Requiring physicians to follow a protocol that is scientifically proven to be inferior to other regimens is an unwarranted intrusion in the physician-patient relationship.
www.acog.org...

ACOG said, in essence, that they would just dump their complications on the local ER.

Prove it. Citation please.

1. The AMA is not ACOG. You might want to learn the difference. So you still did not provide an AMA consensus reference.

2. It's in the very citation you provided above. Did you bother to read it yourself?

a reply to: NavyDoc

1. The AMA is not ACOG. You might want to learn the difference. So you still did not provide an AMA consensus reference.

From my post:

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) filed a joint amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in support of Planned Parenthood’s challenge to Texas House Bill (HB) 2. ACOG and the AMA oppose HB 2 because it imposes government regulation on abortion care that jeopardizes the health of women in Texas and denies them access to the safest and most effective evidence-based protocols for medical abortions.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

1. The AMA is not ACOG. You might want to learn the difference. So you still did not provide an AMA consensus reference.

From my post:

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the American Medical Association (AMA) filed a joint amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in support of Planned Parenthood’s challenge to Texas House Bill (HB) 2. ACOG and the AMA oppose HB 2 because it imposes government regulation on abortion care that jeopardizes the health of women in Texas and denies them access to the safest and most effective evidence-based protocols for medical abortions.

That is not a consensus statement. That is a third party reporting what they claim about it. Provide the original consensus statement, and then we can have a discussion about it.

originally posted by: windword

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

You've performed a surgical abortion.

Yet you don't support LOCAL women's clinics, offering immediate and low cost care ---- and medical abortion.

You're all in favor of this woman having to drive 74 mikes one way, 3 to 4 times --- by PA law.

You are part of the problem. Not part of the solution.

I make it a point NOT to believe every claim made by internet posters, especially those who claim to have done everything and know everything about everything.

These are the same kinds of people who persistently bully and personally insult those that don't present the "proper" attitude for their agenda". These are the people who hide behind that "gentle" counselor outside women's clinics, whose spitting free speech is more valuable than a woman' s right to privacy.

Even though the AMA and the ACOG agree these restriction are not necessary, and the abortion pill should NOT be classified as surgical abortion, these anti-choicers still argue that closing clinic that don't meet new stricter surgical criteria is for health and safety, while insulting, imprisoning and bullying women who still have the nerve to get caught between a rock and a hard place.

I find you a bit hypocritical when you complain about "bullying" people who disagree with you.

If I may quote you form another thread you applied this bit of attempted intimidation:

"But, I/we are aware of your posting history in this regard. Thanks though for the heads up that we're going to need to keep a handy dandy file on you and your amazing posts! "

"We're going to keep a file on you?"

That a bit of implied attempted intimidation and threat, is it not? Sounds like Brownshirts in action.

You really do like to dish it out but are aghast when it's given back aren't you?

Gotta tell ya, I've been in some Mexican facilities that were very refreshing knowing I'm not paying for the artwork on the wall. I'm talking border town

It's a total different experience feeling that you as the patient are the priority.

I really appreciate the awareness experience.

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Sorry I'm on my cell or I'd post the links but a gay couple recently did have a baby look up Thomas Beatie.

The technology is there but requires some plumbing work if you know what I mean.

Add: I'm a little confused with this one now was he a she, then became a he, then he got pregnant?
That's no big deal if true, sorry.

a reply to: NavyDoc

HAHA!

Context man, context.

Why don't post the link so everyone can see what prompted that reply?

a reply to: NavyDoc

Oh my. Excuses, excuses.

It's a press release issued by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, on behalf of them and the AMA.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Sorry I'm on my cell or I'd post the links but a gay couple recently did have a baby look up Thomas Beatie.

The technology is there but requires some plumbing work if you know what I mean.

Add: I'm a little confused with this one now was he a she, then became a he, then he got pregnant?
That's no big deal if true, sorry.

Thomas Beattie is transgender.

The physical body is female. He is a man in a female physical body.

He is not the only one.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

HAHA!

Context man, context.

Why don't post the link so everyone can see what prompted that reply?

What, that you are an obsessive stalker?

This is typical of your M.O. You come on and insult and condescend to members with whom you disagree with and then you act all offended when they stand up to you. You try to bully and intimidate and then claim everyone else is doing the same to you.

Point out any post where I have said anything remotely similar to you.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Sorry I'm on my cell or I'd post the links but a gay couple recently did have a baby look up Thomas Beatie.

The technology is there but requires some plumbing work if you know what I mean.

Add: I'm a little confused with this one now was he a she, then became a he, then he got pregnant?
That's no big deal if true, sorry.

Thomas Beattie is transgender.

The physical body is female. He is a man in a female physical body.

He is not the only one.

Right. So "he" is not a man but a woman. No miracle of modern science there.