Texas abortion law forced women to carry a dead fetus for 2 weeks

[tabzer]

That sounds incredibly invasive.

It's more invasive than assuming one's gender.

 

[Creamu]

It's more invasive than assuming one's gender.

How the f*** is this not considered inhumane by the republican party DaKitten?

 

[tabzer]

How the f*** is this not considered inhumane by the republican party DaKitten?

If I understand how she thinks, she already talked about her genitalia, so it's only fair for her to talk about yours.

 

[RAHelllord]

Yeah. It can take a couple of weeks to clear out. It's almost as if doctors were monitoring her situation before determining a D&C to being the best course of action. I think she should be able to have the D&C upon discovery of the baby having died, and I believe that the doctor wasn't confident enough with her diagnosis.

If the doctor wasn't confident why did she suggest the woman try and induce a complete miscarriage at home? Assuming the doctor wasn't confident that would mean she might have send the woman home to actually kill a viable fetus.

Your argument doesn't make sense even as a hypothetical assumption.

This fake news WAPO article isn't "everything". I specifically called this article fake news, and I have been demonstrating why I think so. Despite it being WAPO, the actual source was Twitter/Youtuber who wants to be famous. Would love to hear what the doctor actually said.

You demonstrated nothing but how you believe a woman talking about her own health experience is lying for clout because she has a public YouTube channel.
That's a hypothesis at best and in light of existing laws and new punishments just outright disingenuous.

There is plenty of literature about woman having grave health consequences from unremoved fetuses or where doctors weren't willing to induce an abortion until the pregnant woman nearly died because the unviable fetus still had a useless heartbeat.
Your entire argument that it isn't a real story hinges on your unfounded assumption that it doesn't fit your worldview that shitty things happen to pregnant woman due to old white man making laws about subjects they know nothing about. No, you don't need to know know every single detail of that woman's medical history and her interactions with the doctor to be able to have an opinion on the situation that doesn't immediately denounce her as a liar.

You want to blame the law if a doctor treats a patient in a way that endangers their health. I want to blame the doctor. I am not saying that D&C is unsafe. You are suggesting that the doctor endangered the woman by not giving it to her at the time she wanted wanted it to

She got the treatment she wanted after her last miscarriage, and requested it so she wouldn't have to go through the pain of the complications from the first time around where the fetus remained inside her for longer.
This also still in direct contradiction with the advise to go home and induce a full miscarriage by herself.

You don't go to jail if you can't pay your fines. You go to jail if you try to hide your assets and avoid court-ordered examination. Contempt.

I actually misread something, the prison sentence isn't from the Texas heartbeat act but from the still legal (and with the fall or Roe v Wade enforceable again) Revised Civil Statutes §4512.1 through §4512.6, and they impose felony criminal liability on anyone who performs an elective abortion, as well as anyone who "furnishes the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended".

The punishment is two to five years' imprisonment for each abortion performed or facilitated, and the statute of limitations is three years

Did you read my last post that was adressing your points?

I did, nothing required a reply so I didn't.

Either way is fine to get the discussion going as is evident in this thread.

It's in your own best interest to go into an argument with a solid basis of knowledge so you have an easier time participating actively and in a way that doesn't exhaust the other participants. It's also generally more courteous to not require everyone else to get yourself up to speed as the discussion is happening. Respect other people's time and they will respect yours, etc etc.

Other people are also a lot less likely to belittle for your lack of knowledge if you don't have to ask questions that 30 seconds on Google can answer in detail.

 

[Creamu]

It's in your own best interest

I was interested in getting the coversation going.

to go into an argument with a solid basis of knowledge so you have an easier time participating actively

If an argument is shaky and someone can inform others, that is a participation I am open to and see value in.

and in a way that doesn't exhaust the other participants.

Oh, don't worry about that. Haha

It's also generally more courteous to not require everyone else to get yourself up to speed as the discussion is happening.

Well, you don't need to respond to it, if you feel it is beneath you. Whether someone makes an argument without full knowledge or someone asks a question, it's not that different.

Respect other people's time and they will respect yours, etc etc.

No, you keep that resposibility to yourself. If you don't see value in setting things straight, then it is on you not to do it. You gave me further information and I took it. Was this a waste of your time, then thats on you. What would the time differnce had been if I was formulating my post in questions.

 

[Dragon91Nippon]

That sounds incredibly invasive.

Maybe but if you were actually a woman you would care about this stuff a little bit more because anti abortion laws essentially mean that your body belongs to someone else (if you're a woman). So techecally we can infer that you are male because if you weren't you would care a bit more (unless you're either too old or have been sterilized).

 

[Creamu]

Maybe but if you were actually a woman you would care about this stuff a little bit more because anti abortion laws essentially mean that your body belongs to someone else (if you're a woman). So techecally we can infer that you are male because if you weren't you would care a bit more (unless you're either too old or have been sterilized).

I kindly ask you not to assume my reproductive organs. Your statement is sexist, women are free to take different positions on different subject matters.

 

[tabzer]

If the doctor wasn't confident why did she suggest the woman try and induce a complete miscarriage at home? Assuming the doctor wasn't confident that would mean she might have send the woman home to actually kill a viable fetus.

Your argument doesn't make sense even as a hypothetical assumption.

I doubt the doctor suggested that the woman try to "induce a complete miscarriage at home". What I could consider to be more realistic of a professional is if they said try to wait it out to see if it happens naturally and schedule a follow-up appointment. If the doctor really suggested DIY then that is unethical and that's the real story.

You demonstrated nothing but how you believe a woman talking about her own health experience is lying for clout because she has a public YouTube channel.
That's a hypothesis at best and in light of existing laws and new punishments just outright disingenuous.

I demonstrated that the story is uncorroborated and hearsay at best. The doctor should be questioned before outrage over this article should be taken seriously. The story might be real, and if it is, I'd be more concerned with the doctor's actions.

There is plenty of literature about woman having grave health consequences from unremoved fetuses or where doctors weren't willing to induce an abortion until the pregnant woman nearly died because the unviable fetus still had a useless heartbeat.

And this isn't one of those situations.

Your entire argument that it isn't a real story hinges on your unfounded assumption that it doesn't fit your worldview that shitty things happen to pregnant woman due to old white man making laws about subjects they know nothing about.

That's not my worldview. It sounds like yours. It's also narrow.

No, you don't need to know know every single detail of that woman's medical history and her interactions with the doctor to be able to have an opinion on the situation that doesn't immediately denounce her as a liar.

I need more information. As it is, it sounds like an embellishment of facts and relevent details are missing.

She got the treatment she wanted after her last miscarriage, and requested it so she wouldn't have to go through the pain of the complications from the first time around where the fetus remained inside her for longer.
This also still in direct contradiction with the advise to go home and induce a full miscarriage by herself.

I do see a contradiction in what you are saying. While I am not proposing it, I don't see how exactly the article is doing so either.

"Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."

This is the closest I could find. It seems to suggest that she wanted to have a second D&C procedure before her second miscarriage--is that another example of poor editing? I am not seeing where timelines of the two miscarriages are being compared.

I actually misread something, the prison sentence isn't from the Texas heartbeat act but from the still legal (and with the fall or Roe v Wade enforceable again) Revised Civil Statutes §4512.1 through §4512.6, and they impose felony criminal liability on anyone who performs an elective abortion, as well as anyone who "furnishes the means for procuring an abortion knowing the purpose intended".

I guess we'll see how that plays out.

 

[Dakitten]

I kindly ask you not to assume my reproductive organs. Your statement is sexist, women are free to take different positions on different subject matters.

You guys are hilarious. You think playing the trans/anonymity card is some kind of gotcha, but y'all are flexing your own ignorance and bigotry.

Even a Trans woman would not presume to intrinsically know what it is like to be pregnant, so you obviously are not that. A Trans man or a cis woman would know enough about their body to not repeat your ignorant comments, so you obviously are not that either.

You are almost certainly a dumb boy with a stunning amount of ego desperate for validation. If I am wrong, feel free to say so... but I am almost certainly not and your games are just proof you are a disingenuous interlocutor with delusions of recognized content contributions swirling in your head.

 

[Creamu]

You guys are hilarious. You think playing the trans/anonymity card is some kind of gotcha, but y'all are flexing your own ignorance and bigotry.

I was kindly asking you to not assume my reproductive organs.

You are almost certainly a dumb boy

Please don't...

your games

All I am asking is to keep my reproductive organs out of this.

 

[tabzer]

You guys are hilarious. You think playing the trans/anonymity card is some kind of gotcha, but y'all are flexing your own ignorance and bigotry.

Even a Trans woman would not presume to intrinsically know what it is like to be pregnant, so you obviously are not that. A Trans man or a cis woman would know enough about their body to not repeat your ignorant comments, so you obviously are not that either.

You are almost certainly a dumb boy with a stunning amount of ego desperate for validation. If I am wrong, feel free to say so... but I am almost certainly not and your games are just proof you are a disingenuous interlocutor with delusions of recognized content contributions swirling in your head.

Is this your version of "tits or gtfo"?

You want me to disclose the nature of my genitalia to you?

Not all women agree with you. Deal with it.

 

[lolcatzuru]

https://web.archive.org/web/2022072...07/20/abortion-miscarriage-texas-fetus-stell/

Tl;dr jesus christ this is fucked
She had to get several invasive ultra sounds, all to prove without a doubt that the fetus was dead. Otherwise the doctors would risk loosing their medical license. How the fuck is this not considered inhumane by the republican party?

Oh wait
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/14/anti-abotion-10-year-old-ohio-00045843
"“She would have had the baby, and as many women who have had babies as a result of rape, we would hope that she would understand the reason and ultimately the benefit of having the child,”' From Jim Bop, one of the major people who wrote the right to life laws that exist in many states. Talking about the benefits of having a child as a 10 year old.

So never mind, odds are this is the thing you supported. And if you didn't? Maybe don't be surprised that the lions ate my face party, decides to eat your face. And for those who said "well it wasn't enumerated as a constitutional right, so therefore it's right to remove abortion/make it a state choice" not only is implied and stated we have un-enumerated rights, but now you have this problem having several times over, so was it worth removing something that everyone had already accepted as a right? Just because it had supposedly shaky ground?
So, let me ask you Republican voters. How would you go about solving these issues? Because now, as part of the party that caused this problem, you better have a reasonable solution to it without being utterly arbitrary.

we should tax the middle class more! that help!

 

[lolcatzuru]

More to the point, as a republican, this is absurd, i agree, and where i do believe that abortion should be banned, as i believe it affects discipline, i do think there need to be exceptions, like this example, where something can be easily solved. I think part of the problem is, liberals were fine foregoing rights to the magic needle, and the government took that as an opportunity to take away more.

 

[Creamu]

we should tax the middle class more! that help!

But Lolcatzuru-san, taxing the middle class will destabilize things with this ongoing inflation and coming crisis?!

 

[lolcatzuru]

But Lolcatzuru-san, taxing the middle class will destabilize things with this ongoing inflation and coming crisis?!

no no you fool didnt you hear the senile old man on TV?!?! borrowing more money and taxing the middle class will be extremely helpful! and one of his lackeys even said inflation is a good thing! the TV would never lie!

 

[Creamu]

no no you fool didnt you hear the senile old man on TV?!?!

I heard of him before. The ice-cream man.

borrowing more money and taxing the middle class will be extremely helpful! and one of his lackeys even said inflation is a good thing! the TV would never lie!

Okay, I believe it!

where i do believe that abortion should be banned, as i believe it affects discipline,

Discipline is a persuasive argument. We can use more of that.

I think part of the problem is, liberals were fine foregoing rights to the magic needle, and the government took that as an opportunity to take away more.

Yeah, it is an ironic twist of discourse.

 

[lolcatzuru]

I heard of him before. The ice-cream man.

Okay, I believe it!

Discipline is a persuasive argument. We can use more of that.

Yeah, it is an ironic twist of discourse.

That's solely the reason im against abortion, is that it passes the buck off of the people that got involved, ironically ,this is what they do in communist states with guns right? " well, it isn't the homicidal maniacs fault! the gun made him do it!" and the proceed to try to sue the gun manufacturer though ironically, we dont sue car manufacturer's which is just the darndest thing. If we want to pursue this idea that people aren't held responsible for their actions, then i guess we should let derrick chauvin out of the joint, as its not HIS fault, its isaac newton's fault, how dare that son of a bitch create the law's of gravity, if he didn't maybe Floyd would be alive.

believe that if people know that they can make a mistake that can't be easily fixed, hopefully they'll stop doing it, perhaps its a forlorn idea but, either way, its better than fragrant disregard of behavior.

 

[Creamu]

That's solely the reason im against abortion, is that it passes the buck off of the people that got involved, ironically ,this is what they do in communist states with guns right? " well, it isn't the homicidal maniacs fault! the gun made him do it!" and the proceed to try to sue the gun manufacturer though ironically, we dont sue car manufacturer's which is just the darndest thing.

Yes, they rule with hermetic dialectic to suck up power, to get what the want without showing themselves, because no one would accept them.

I believe that if people know that they can make a mistake that can't be easily fixed, hopefully they'll stop doing it, perhaps its a forlorn idea but, either way, its better than fragrant disregard of behavior.

To a point. There are people who can't help themselves, but if you abandon standards there is no more insentive for discipline and you grow a culture of neglect and nihilism.

 

[RAHelllord]

I doubt the doctor suggested that the woman try to "induce a complete miscarriage at home". What I could consider to be more realistic of a professional is if they said try to wait it out to see if it happens naturally and schedule a follow-up appointment. If the doctor really suggested DIY then that is unethical and that's the real story.

Medication to take at home for an abortion is completely normal, there is nothing really suspect about that by itself, especially since the medication usually takes up to three days.

I demonstrated that the story is uncorroborated and hearsay at best. The doctor should be questioned before outrage over this article should be taken seriously. The story might be real, and if it is, I'd be more concerned with the doctor's actions.

The doctor wouldn't be able to talk about it because of privacy laws, it also shouldn't be even required to take a plausible report seriously. Based on existing laws this is entirely feasible behavior to keep their medical license.

And this isn't one of those situations.

Luckily, nothing stops it from becoming one of those for other woman in the same position, and then having to deal with the fallout.

That's not my worldview. It sounds like yours. It's also narrow.

It's not narrow; it matches reality. The exceeding majority of laws in the US written that govern abortion procedures and other reproductive rights have been written and voted into law by old, white men with a negligible portion being contributed by woman.

And that is a problem when those lawmakers demonstrate time and time again they know exactly nothing about woman's reproductive health.

It still makes my blood boil that people like former congressman Todd Akin, who thinks that a woman's body has ways to shut pregnancy from "legitimate rape" down, are able to make laws for those things.

I need more information. As it is, it sounds like an embellishment of facts and relevent details are missing.

No relevant details are missing, you just want to enforce a silly amount of burden of proof and "require" details to believe a story that have no reason to be public.

No, we don't have to have a full interview under oath before we can extend a trivial amount of courtesy and take it at face value. If the woman lied for personal gain that can be sorted out later, right now there are valid concers as the story is plausible the way it supposedly happened.

I do see a contradiction in what you are saying. While I am not proposing it, I don't see how exactly the article is doing so either.

"Stell had the procedure after her first miscarriage in 2018 in Washington state, when she felt so much pain that she could not walk, and she wanted to go through with it again before trying again for a second child, she told The Washington Post."

This is the closest I could find. It seems to suggest that she wanted to have a second D&C procedure before her second miscarriage--is that another example of poor editing? I am not seeing where timelines of the two miscarriages are being compared.

The second D&C procedure in the section you pasted references the one she asked to have done in Texas, and was denied because of the heartbeat act going into effect, see the quote I gave earlier.

I guess we'll see how that plays out.

I'd really rather not when the life of people are at stake during medical emergencies. Just because Mrs Stell survived doesn't mean everyone else will. An ectopic pregnancy that ruptures a fallopian tube but still has a heartbeat will kill the mother before the fetus stops having a heartbeat.
There are too many ways that happen with some regularity that are completely ignored by the laws in effect to just sit around and wait.

Well, you don't need to respond to it, if you feel it is beneath you. Whether someone makes an argument without full knowledge or someone asks a question, it's not that different.

It's not that it's beneath me, it's that just acknowledging your reply doesn't really feel worth a dedicated response in an active thread.

No, you keep that resposibility to yourself. If you don't see value in setting things straight, then it is on you not to do it. You gave me further information and I took it. Was this a waste of your time, then thats on you. What would the time differnce had been if I was formulating my post in questions.

I said respect, not responsibility.
It's not exactly reflecting well on you if your idea of good participation is breaking things on the basis that if it's worth something someone else will repair it.

 

[Creamu]

It's not that it's beneath me, it's that just acknowledging your reply doesn't really feel worth a dedicated response in an active thread.

My post was an ice-breaker since there was much laughter, dead air, and users who insisted on a response.

I said respect, not responsibility.
It's not exactly reflecting well on you if your idea of good participation is breaking things on the basis that if it's worth something someone else will repair it.

That's the nature of discourse.