martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Yes. Or what random state legislators think is ideal.
A Trial in Philadelphia
- Thread starter the iron horse
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Yes. Or what random state legislators think is ideal.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Health standards are constantly changing. I know that I would be concerned with going to any clinic that was compliant with decade or two-decade-old standards. So I don't see changing standards, on principle, to be onerous. And it's clear from the legal investigation into Karpen that there is a regulation problem in TX as there was with Gosnell in PA, which in turn led to their higher standards (without much of an apparent public outcry.)
I'm not trying to be purposefully obtuse -- there are intense political pressures on both sides of this issue. I'm just wondering if there is a way to appease both sides, or if the political pressure has overshadowed the issue. Or if, at this point, the pressure *is* the issue. As nbcrusader pointed out, there's a lot of money to be made when you can demonize your opponent.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I don't think Nathan is being intentionally disingenuous, if that's what your getting at. I believe Nathan when he says he's trying to be a realist and find common ground, but we all come to the table with our own agendas, common ground or no.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I realize that, but I'm doing my best. I credit FYM with broadening my perspective over the years -- otherwise I wouldn't drop in from time to time. I understand that my posts can sometimes come across as having a superior tone -- perhaps I'm only trying to match the moral superiority that certain posters use with their own posts. Just because we think a thing, does not always make it so. I am reminded of that constantly -- here and elsewhere.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
Did you even read my post?
No medical groups anywhere proposed making these changes. It was purely political. Are you having trouble understanding this?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
If this was truly about the health of the patients then why is there not a push to increase ALL clinics to level of surgical centers?
I think you are confusing two issues here. Gosnell and Karpen didn't exist because of regulation or standard issues with the clinics, they existed due to the fact that the state not being able to choosing not to police their existing standards.
The answer to this is REAL EASY. You say, OK if you're really concerned about the health of these women than let's let the medical experts and not politicians assess and redevelop if need be the standards of these clinics. But we all know the answer to that, don't we?
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I guess I don't see things as clearly as you, in part because of the dual forces at play in terms of my convictions. There are legal ramifications at play here which means that legislators have a responsibility to discern the best way to form laws, and it's a challenge to divorce the issues from the political forces at play.
And of course there are political forces at play --on both sides. PP is no less a political force than Operation Rescue, and they are certainly working hard to stand with Wendy.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
I probably see things a little more clearly as you because I'm not as married to one side or the other. I also once worked in the medical field, and I know the different regulations as to what defines a practice vs a clinic vs a surgical center vs a hospital and what can and cannot take place at each.
I also see that there is no concern about other clinics that perform riskier procedures, and there is no need or want to make them upgrade to a surgical center. This alone should be obvious to you and other supporters who are claiming health reasons.
I think legislators have an obligation to consult with experts, they did not for this politically overreaching move.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Please see my earlier comment regarding the fact that those other centers do not potentially put two lives at risk, depending on how we're defining life. I have also yet to see dermatologist's offices or dentist's offices that have been deemed "houses of horrors." TX legislators expressed concern about the safety of these centers and this procedure, and given what else is happening in their state and others, I don't find that concern unwarranted.
Legislators in PA put higher standards into place; I don't think TX deserves less.
IMHO.
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Sure they do. Where have you been? They deal with emergency issues all the time in clinics. Go to your local emergency clinic and ask them what they deal with, and then ask them if they have the same building standards as a surgical center.
Well it may have not made national news yet, but it sure has made local news but a dermatologist here in TX just got sentenced for sexual assault and unwarranted procedures. More than 2 dozen women in 30 years came forward. It's resulted in 3 suicides so far. Once again, nothing to do with the standards as far as equipment and building code, but if the state were policing their doctors correctly this could have been taken care of years ago, the first complaint was in 1986.
Then Nathan, be honest with your elected officials and tell them they need to focus their concern on policing those who practice medicine first. Ask Perry how it is he allowed unlicensed "doctors" to perform butcher sessions under his watch? This law wouldn't have changed that.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Ugh. That's horrible and heartbreaking.
I don't think it's a secret to anyone that women's health care in this country is lackluster at a variety of levels. My aunt fought for years to get her fibromyalgia recognized by her health insurance. My wife has been appalled for years by the sometimes blatant sexism that she's received from health care providers -- part of why she's resorted to naturopathy. So I guess we all have to address what concerns we have about different aspects of women's health as best we can. At your recommendation, I just sent an email to Gov. Perry's office expressing my disappointment at this situation. Thanks for flagging it for me.
In the meantime, driving home tonight I heard a report on NPR that around 60% of Americans polled fluctuate between pro-choice with restrictions and pro-life with exceptions. I felt like it described how I feel most days. Made me feel like maybe the conversation we're having here is representative of the country as a whole.
trojanchick99
Rock n' Roll Doggie FOB
Yes, Women's healthcare in this country has been substandard. And yet, Republicans througout this country are still trying to make it worse. The growing trend of requiring transvaginal ultrasounds before an abortion can be performed makes me sick.
As others have written in this thread, the TX law is just another attempt to limit access to health care which may include abortions for the women of Texas. You know that "abortion clinics" also provide other healthcare, for which there is usually no or a very small charge. These clinics will now no longer be able to provide that healthcare because legislators who don't even know what a freaking rape kit does think they know better than doctors.
You can see why many women are upset right?
As others have written in this thread, the TX law is just another attempt to limit access to health care which may include abortions for the women of Texas. You know that "abortion clinics" also provide other healthcare, for which there is usually no or a very small charge. These clinics will now no longer be able to provide that healthcare because legislators who don't even know what a freaking rape kit does think they know better than doctors.
You can see why many women are upset right?
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
My state is insanely corrupted by GOP politics. This means nothing.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Of course. Can you see why many people -- men and women -- are passionately concerned about this issue on the other side?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Of course.
Can we admit now that what's going on in TX is not about women's health and entirely about reducing the aggregate number of abortions -- and achieving bragging rights for the base for the '14 midterms -- by hook or by crook?
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
An unpleasant, yet apt, image for this topic.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Was that the motivation in PA?
Do I believe there is a political bent to this issue? Sure. Do I believe it's representative of the tension that exists in the country? Sure. Do I believe that, according to statistics, the majority of Americans seem to want more restrictions and regulations on abortion, to maintain the health and safety of those seeking abortions as well as for the unborn babies that may be at risk due to the actions of butchers like Karpen and Gosnell, while at the same time protecting a woman's right to choose? Sure. Do I believe that the majority of Americans, in wanting to do so, are waging a war against women, or are pawns in a diabolical GOP-led plot to force women into back-alley abortions? No. I do not.
If you do, then we should probably just stop talking in circles and lay this thread to rest, because we aren't going to get anywhere.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Restrictions and regulations on abortions themselves, yes, that's what it's about.
You've extrapolated far beyond my question, just as this legislation has intentions far beyond keeping women safe.
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Well, you've made a lot of comments and insinuations -- or outright accusations -- about me and my motives and perspective in the course of this conversation. So I just thought I'd address a bunch of them all at once.
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
Well, you've made a lot of comments and insinuations -- or outright accusations -- about me and my motives and perspective in the course of this conversation. So I just thought I'd address a bunch of them all at once.
I think we've revealed them?
nathan1977
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Sure. I'm right about in the middle of how the majority of Americans feel about this issue. I'm struggling with how to address it -- with the balancing act of ethical considerations, women's health, a woman's legally protected right to choose, and health standards and regulations that have been problematic (or outright ignored) by clinics in more than one state -- but pretty sure that a hard-line one way or the other isn't the answer. Right where I was when I came into this conversation.
So...Congratulations, I guess?
Irvine511
Blue Crack Supplier
I feel satisfied that we better understand what's going on in TX as well as the obsession with the Gosnell case and that neither are about safety but the manipulation if "safety" to further an agenda.
I think it's very difficult to really ascertain how most Americans feel about the issue so long as it is in the abstract. If abortion were banned or constructively banned (which is the intended effect of most of these legislative proposals from the GOP), would opinions change? Would there be a case of buyer's remorse if suddenly there was no access? If politicians' daughters couldn't get an abortion, and so on?
When you say "safe, legal and rare" I think that we have a different idea of how to achieve the "rare" bit. To me, it has to do with comprehensive sex education in public school (something the GOP is against), cheap and accessible birth control (again, something the GOP is against and let's not forget Limbaugh's assault on "sluts" on birth control), funding clinics like Planned Parenthood so that poor women and scared teenagers whose parents have buried their heads in the sand like ostriches and are shoving abstinence down the throats of girls who are sexually active (again, something the GOP wants to de-fund, and they've already done that in Texas only to have buyer's remorse now that the costs are high so they are looking to re-fund PP to at least some degree), etc. These are all things that the conservatives are by and large against. To them, rare means shutting down clinics, imposing regulations that are unnecessary, forcing intrusive transvaginal ultrasounds for no medical reason whatsoever because they want to guilt and bully pregnant women and so on.
So when you say "safe, legal and rare" and I agree, I don't think you and I are talking about the same thing.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
You could ask South Dakotans about that.
PhilsFan
Blue Crack Addict
Well. I guess we have confirmed that he has put me on ignore.
The ignore button might be the worst invention on this forum. Ignoring ideas is a shitty way to go about a debate.
Oh yes, those were the geniuses who re-defined pregnancy as beginning at conception, a completely scientifically absurd idea.
