Pennsylvania mother who gave daughter abortion pill gets prison

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Right of Choice is irrational?

LOL. Many of the people who go on about "choice" as an absolute are perfectly happy with banning MY choices (say to own that full auto 1945 Thompson Machine gun I'd love to have in the safe) or my choice not to fund the latest welfare scheme so I always find that statement hypocritical.

Certainly "right of choice" can be irrational. You do not, nor should not, have the right to break your granddaughter's leg no matter how much you want to.

The belief that one's "choice" must be funded by the public at large is irrational. In fact, if you demand that I fund your choice, then I have the right to have a say the that "choice" I am funding. You cannot demand someone else pay for your "choice" while at the same time insist that they have no input into said "choice." Not only is that irrational, it is fundamentally unjust.

The belief that "choice" supersedes sane and sensible medical standards is also irrational.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Right of Choice is irrational?

LOL. Many of the people who go on about "choice" as an absolute are perfectly happy with banning MY choices (say to own that full auto 1945 Thompson Machine gun I'd love to have in the safe) or my choice not to fund the latest welfare scheme so I always find that statement hypocritical.

Certainly "right of choice" can be irrational. You do not, nor should not, have the right to break your granddaughter's leg no matter how much you want to.

You seriously made that comparison?

Gun rights vs Right of Choice of a woman's reproduction rights?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: NavyDoc

Right of Choice is irrational?

LOL. Many of the people who go on about "choice" as an absolute are perfectly happy with banning MY choices (say to own that full auto 1945 Thompson Machine gun I'd love to have in the safe) or my choice not to fund the latest welfare scheme so I always find that statement hypocritical.

Certainly "right of choice" can be irrational. You do not, nor should not, have the right to break your granddaughter's leg no matter how much you want to.

You seriously made that comparison?

Gun rights vs Right of Choice of a woman's reproduction rights?

Actually yes, they are both civil liberties and both choices. Are you saying that some "right of choice" is more valid than others? Kind of defeats the entire principle of choice does it not? Don't like an abortion? Don't have one. Don't like guns? Don't buy one. Same/same.

Reproductive rights are not any more or less important than other rights?

Why do you think a woman is just a uterus? She has a brain too. She also has the right to free speech, self defense, economic freedom, property--all just as important if not more than the right to an abortion.

a reply to: NavyDoc

It requires close supervision due to potentially life threatening adverse effects.

Nonsense! They give it to people to take at home all the time. Complication with medical abortions are extreemly rare. However, at 75 miles away, this woman would have had to have taken her daughter to the ER anyway, if complications arose, which they didn't. This woman did the ubber responsible thing and went to the ER, (even through cramping and bleeding is what is expected) so that her child COULD have the "close supervision" that YOU say that the daughter needed. She did everything right, given the circumstances, in my opinion.

Taking Mifepristone and a prostaglandin is a very safe and effective method which leads to a successful abortion in 98% of cases. Taking the prostaglandin may cause menstrual disorders like cramping in the lower abdomen; taking paintreatment might therefore be necessary. We offer you to stay in the clinic for a couple of hours after intake of the prostaglandin. If you prefer to take the prostaglandin tablets at home, you should have painkillers on hand.
www.gynmed.at...

They give it to people to take at home all the time. Women prefer the medical methods, as it seems very natural.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

It requires close supervision due to potentially life threatening adverse effects.

Nonsense! They give to people to take at home all the time. Complication with medical abortions are extreemly rare. However, at 75 miles away, this woman would have had to have taken her daughter to the ER anyway, if complications arose, which they didn't. This woman did the ubber responsible thing and went to the ER, (even through cramping and bleeding is what is expected) so that her child COULD have the "close supervision" that YOU say that the daughter needed. She did everything right, given the circumstances, in my opinion.

Taking Mifepristone and a prostaglandin is a very safe and effective method which leads to a successful abortion in 98% of cases. Taking the prostaglandin may cause menstrual disorders like cramping in the lower abdomen; taking paintreatment might therefore be necessary. We offer you to stay in the clinic for a couple of hours after intake of the prostaglandin. If you prefer to take the prostaglandin tablets at home, you should have painkillers on hand.
www.gynmed.at...

They give it to people to take at home all the time. Women prefer the medical methods, as it seems very natural.

Not nonsense at all. It is the medical standard of care and such for very important reasons. You don't do a self abortion with a trocar you bought over the internet for the same reason--you need the training, qualifications, and resources to do it safely.

They can take the drugs at home if, after a good history and physical it is determined safe and they have follow up care to make sure there is no complications.

Giving your kid a drug that you bought over the internet with zero knowledge and training and then taking her to the ER when things get "ugly" is nowhere near the definition of "uber responsible." That's the very definition of "moronic."

It is interesting that you used an Austrian abortion clinic website for your information that seems a bit odd. It is interesting since Austrian abortion laws and situation seems much more strict than ours:

Abortion in Austria has been fully legalized since January 23, 1974.[1] Abortions can be performed on-demand in hospitals for women whose pregnancies have not exceeded twelve weeks.[1] Abortions can be performed later if there is a physical or mental health threat to the mother, if there is an incurable problem with the development of the fetus, or if the patient is under the age of 14.[2]

There is no punishment for doctors who choose not to perform abortions based on personal or religious convictions, except if the life of the mother is at stake and a lack of abortion causes the mother's death.[1] The 1974 law protects doctors who choose not to perform abortions.[1] There are very few abortion clinics or hospitals with abortion capability outside major cities, making it next to impossible to have an abortion in rural areas.[2] Abortions are not paid for by the government health system.[2]

12 week limit for elective abortions. Defined qualifications for abortion clinics and hospitals that limits them to major cities (Just like in PA it seems), and not paid for by the public. I guess the evil Republicans have gotten to the Austrians as well!!!


As for the complications of RU 486, let's go to a better source, the manufacturers, shall we?

Serious and sometimes fatal infections and bleeding occur very rarely following spontaneous, surgical, and medical abortions, including following Mifeprex use. No causal relationship between the use of Mifeprex and misoprostol and these events has been established. A high index of suspicion is needed to rule out serious and rarely fatal infections (e.g. Clostridium sordellii) and sepsis that can present without fever, bacteremia or significant findings on a pelvic exam, with or without abdominal pain, but with leukocytosis with a marked left shift, tachycardia, hemoconcentration, and general malaise.

Cramping and bleeding are expected; bleeding may continue for 9-16 days. 5-8% of women will need a surgical procedure to end a pregnancy or stop heavy bleeding.

Patients should be counseled to seek immediate medical attention if they experience sustained fever (100.4° F or higher), severe abdominal pain, prolonged heavy vaginal bleeding, syncope or general malaise more than 24 hours after taking misoprostol.

Mifeprex should not be used in cases of confirmed or suspected ectopic pregnancy, as Mifeprex is not effective in terminating these pregnancies. Physicians may need to consider the possibility of a ruptured ectopic pregnancy, even if efforts were made to rule out an ectopic pregnancy, because an ectopic pregnancy may have been missed.

www.earlyoptionpill.com...

5-8% of users will experience retained products of conception (for the layman there is still stuff fetus/placenta/etc left in the uterus) that can cause life threatening sepsis (partially aborted materials will decay in utero) and therefore 5-8% will need to go onto a surgical abortion anyway. Not a large percentage risk but not rare either. Given the above, common sense would dictate that the medication needs to be done under the supervision of a trained and qualified professional and that is why that is indeed the law in most of the western world.

This situation would be very much like a rural person not wanting to travel 74 miles to the nearest neurologist (in rural areas everywhere, including the US, Canada, Europe, Australia specialists of all times are often distant) for her underage daughter's headaches, reading online that beta blockers can help migraines, buying some off the internet to give to her, and then rushing her off to the hospital when she develops cardiac dysrhythmias. Not only would you not be calling that person "uber responsible", you'd be calling her an idiot and downright criminal.

Here is the irrationality of the pro abortion advocates--that even simple medical common sense must be sacrificed on the altar of abortion at all times for any reason without any delay or thought. This is just as irrational as the anti-abortion fanatics that insist a blastocyst is a person.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

It requires close supervision due to potentially life threatening adverse effects.

Nonsense! They give it to people to take at home all the time. Complication with medical abortions are extreemly rare.

Yep!

My daughter took an "abortion" pill she got from the Free Clinic (within walking distance).

Some mild cramping. That's it.

originally posted by: Annee
Why is women's right to her production choices still an issue?

Oh wait, I know ------- Right Wing Christians.

I know plenty of atheists that are against abortion. This is not a religious issue.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

It requires close supervision due to potentially life threatening adverse effects.

Nonsense! They give it to people to take at home all the time. Complication with medical abortions are extreemly rare.

Yep!

My daughter took an "abortion" pill she got from the Free Clinic (within walking distance).

Some mild cramping. That's it.

I wonder what the poor fetus felt?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

It requires close supervision due to potentially life threatening adverse effects.

Nonsense! They give it to people to take at home all the time. Complication with medical abortions are extreemly rare.

Yep!

My daughter took an "abortion" pill she got from the Free Clinic (within walking distance).

Some mild cramping. That's it.

And that's what many people experience. However, she would have gone back to the free clinic, and had follow up care to determine everything was okay, yes? And the clinic discussed potential issues and gave her an avenue to be evaluated if there was a complication, yes? She was examined and a history and physical taken before the prescription was given, yes?

Or did they just say, "wanna pill? Here you go. Go to the ER if there is any problems?"

originally posted by: Bone75


I know plenty of atheists that are against abortion. This is not a religious issue.

This is a religious and political debate, the right has lock stepped both hindered the abilities of women for medical care and limited the ability for people to vote. The polls all say republicans are more motivated to vote in the upcoming elections, but I'm keeping a wait and see attitude.

Both these issues call for larger and more intrusive government.

Locking people up in prison is a hallmark of the republicans, look around people!

a reply to: LDragonFire

It really isn't either political or religious, though both are used to push their agendas.

It's all really rather simple, no.matter how you may try to phrase it...

The right to life vs the right to murder an unborn, unwanted child.

The only question is which side of the above you are on. It is a question one must ask themself, not others.

imo

a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

I know. It's a nasty situation and I agree that it shouldn't have happened at all. This girl probably needed her mother more than ever right now and to have this happen on top of all else would be a lot for an adult to handle. Worse for a teen. Mifepristone is actually a prescription drug and in the US, also requires a second medication to induce contractions to avoid complications. It's definitely not OTC.
en.wikipedia.org...

I have my reasons as well for not defending this mother's actions. 74 miles is not that great of a distance to assure that something is done properly. She should not have had to drive that far but being as it is right now, she should've taken the time to do it for her daughter's sake.

originally posted by: ausername
a reply to: LDragonFire

It really isn't either political or religious, though both are used to push their agendas.

It's all really rather simple, no.matter how you may try to phrase it...

The right to life vs the right to murder an unborn, unwanted child.

The only question is which side of the above you are on. It is a question one must ask themself, not others.

imo

Its between the woman, her doctor and god, and you or me should have nothing to do with it, much less a political party dominated by old white men!!!

a reply to: LDragonFire

I agree!

Just to add, that the consequences of the choices made in these cases are not exclusive to the mother and the unborn in the end...

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: NavyDoc

It requires close supervision due to potentially life threatening adverse effects.

Nonsense! They give it to people to take at home all the time. Complication with medical abortions are extreemly rare.

Yep!

My daughter took an "abortion" pill she got from the Free Clinic (within walking distance).

Some mild cramping. That's it.

n

I wonder what the poor fetus felt?

Bunch of parasite cells?

I've had an abortion too. I would do it again under the same circumstances.

You can keep your self righteousness.

originally posted by: Annee

Bunch of parasite cells?

We all know what causes pregnancy. It's not like a woman goes swimming in a nasty pond and gets invaded by a bug.


Your antagonistic comparison is losing it's shock value... thank God.

a reply to: LDragonFire

First, abortion isn't medical care, its medical murder.

Second, limiting the ability of illegal aliens, convicted felons, and dead people to vote is a good thing, but that's another topic for another thread, and that also has nothing to do with religion.

In the state she lives in you must have a doctor perform the type of abortion she performed (not the morning after pill, the abortion pill; available in the USA by prescription only).

She went to an international site, bought a pill not available without a prescription in the USA; and administered that treatment without the supervision of a physician.

In the state she lives in those action carry a punishment of up to 7 years in prison... she got 1.

Seems a fair judgement based on the crimes committed in PA by the mother, regardless of any individual feelings for or against abortion.

God Bless,

originally posted by: AnteBellum

The Pennsylvania case follows the prosecution of a Florida man who pleaded guilty to tricking his girlfriend into taking an abortion pill. He was sentenced in January to 13 years in prison and $28,500 restitution. In June, Florida toughened state law to allow for prosecutions in the death of non-viable fetuses.

So do we all agree that the sentence handed down to this guy in Florida was fair? I haven't heard anyone oppose it yet.

Tell me, why does whether or not the woman wants the child effect the fetus's value? If that's the case, then shouldn't whether or not the father wants the child effect it's value as well?

Double standard much?

originally posted by: Bone75
a reply to: LDragonFire

First, abortion isn't medical care, its medical murder.

Second, limiting the ability of illegal aliens, convicted felons, and dead people to vote is a good thing, but that's another topic for another thread, and that also has nothing to do with religion.

There both right wing ideologies that further alienate voter groups against the right. The right are losing elections based on performance, and ideologies that don't resonate with the majority of voters... So instead of adjusting the ideology they adjust the rules for voting and change abortion laws making it more difficult for women.

If women show up to vote in this midterm, the republicans will be crushed again and these rules will be overturned.