Virginia women protest "state mandated rape"

[Si modo]

Aaaaand...By what authority should the State be able to yank a Doctor's license for not performing a medical procedure which is not medically necessary...?

Pay attention, Val. If a state has mandated that NO elective abortion is done after the first trimester, a physician who does an abortion after the first trimester will have his license yanked by the state.

And, the physician will ensure that his license is not at risk by ensuring that s/he is NOT doing an abortion after the first trimester. The physician can be an idiot and trust what the patient says to determine gestational age, or trust what the most accurate method of determining gestational age is.

I'm not so sure you can figure this out.

Fuck off with your repeated snarky condescension, AS IF there's any thing I am incapable of comprehending...

....

.... IF a woman has chosen to bear a pregnancy to full term, transvaginal ultrasounds are considered to be most accurate way to monitor the growth of the fetus, BUT for women who have already chosen to abort, the gestational age can be determined fairly accurately in OTHER ways IF necessary...The VAST MAJORITY of abortion cases the procedure is STILL medically unnecessary...Thus, requiring an overly invasive unnecessary medical procedure is BLATANT authoritarian over reach by the State.

Keep trying to deny there is no such thing defensive medicine.

 

[Valerie]

Pay attention, Val. If a state has mandated that NO elective abortion is done after the first trimester, a physician who does an abortion after the first trimester will have his license yanked by the state.

And, the physician will ensure that his license is not at risk by ensuring that s/he is NOT doing an abortion after the first trimester. The physician can be an idiot and trust what the patient says to determine gestational age, or trust what the most accurate method of determining gestational age is.

I'm not so sure you can figure this out.

Fuck off with your repeated snarky condescension, AS IF there's any thing I am incapable of comprehending...

....

.... IF a woman has chosen to bear a pregnancy to full term, transvaginal ultrasounds are considered to be most accurate way to monitor the growth of the fetus, BUT for women who have already chosen to abort, the gestational age can be determined fairly accurately in OTHER ways IF necessary...The VAST MAJORITY of abortion cases the procedure is STILL medically unnecessary...Thus, requiring an overly invasive unnecessary medical procedure is BLATANT authoritarian over reach by the State.

Keep trying to deny there is no such thing defensive medicine.

Not what I've posted...



Always sooo desperate to feeel right about SOMEthing, huh?

By a vote of 7-2, with Justices White and Rehnquist in dissent, the Court agreed with Roe and upheld her right to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester (90 days). The Court observed that Section 1 of the 14th Amendment contained three references to “person.” In his majority opinion, Justice Blackmun noted that, for nearly all such references in the Constitution, “use of the word is such that it has application only postnatally. None indicates, with any assurance, that it has any possible prenatal application.”


Blackmun's opinion carefully steered between the right to privacy and the question of compelling State interest. On the first point, he wrote, the majority of the justices “do not agree” with Texas that the State “may override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake.” On the other hand, the State does have an “important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life” and in protecting the mother's health.


Blackmun's decision revolved around the development of the fetus during pregnancy. He held that during the first trimester, or three months, of a pregnancy, the woman in consultation with her physician had an unrestricted rightto an abortion. During the second trimester, States could regulate abortion to protect a woman's health. Finally, during the third trimester, the State's interest in protecting the potential life of the fetus was sufficient to justify severe restrictions.


Approaching the matter of when life begins, Blackmun was clearly hesitant to commit the Court to any position.


Controversial when announced, the Roe decision remains at the center of the legal controversy over the right to privacy versus the rights of the unborn.


In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1992, the Court reaffirmed Roe's central holding but abandoned its trimester structure. The Court permitted States to require informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, and/or parental notification, but held that States may not place an “undue burden”on a woman's right to an abortion.

Roe v. Wade (1973)

 

[Valerie]

I don't understand why ANYONE would be opposed to making a woman view an altrasound before she decides to put the child in the blender..

Funny how Obama can force someone to buy a product, yet forcing an individual to view an altrasound as a prerequisite to having an abortion is somehow "wrong?"

No one is forcing a woman to view an ultrasound in Virginia, asshole.

They ARE forcing it in Texas and pushing for the same in other States... Did you even bother to read the Guttmacher link I've post a half dozen times???



Required for Each Abortion; The Provider Must Display and Describe the Image

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf



IMO if anything is "evil", that is Evil.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

I don't understand why ANYONE would be opposed to making a woman view an altrasound before she decides to put the child in the blender..

Funny how Obama can force someone to buy a product, yet forcing an individual to view an altrasound as a prerequisite to having an abortion is somehow "wrong?"

No one is forcing a woman to view an ultrasound in Virginia, asshole.

They ARE forcing it in Texas and pushing for the same in other States... Did you even bother to read the Guttmacher link I've post a half dozen times???



Required for Each Abortion; The Provider Must Display and Describe the Image

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf



IMO if anything is "evil", that is Evil.

What? Let me ask you this. When you go into the doctor's office and they weigh you. Are they forcing you to be weighed, or did you CHOOSE to go into the office KNOWING they would weigh you as part of the procedure?

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Fuck off with your repeated snarky condescension, AS IF there's any thing I am incapable of comprehending...

....

Keep trying to deny there is no such thing defensive medicine.

Not what I've posted...



Always sooo desperate to feeel right about SOMEthing, huh?

By a vote of 7-2, with Justices White and Rehnquist in dissent, the Court agreed with Roe and upheld her right to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester (90 days). The Court observed that Section 1 of the 14th Amendment contained three references to “person.” In his majority opinion, Justice Blackmun noted that, for nearly all such references in the Constitution, “use of the word is such that it has application only postnatally. None indicates, with any assurance, that it has any possible prenatal application.”


Blackmun's opinion carefully steered between the right to privacy and the question of compelling State interest. On the first point, he wrote, the majority of the justices “do not agree” with Texas that the State “may override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake.” On the other hand, the State does have an “important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life” and in protecting the mother's health.


Blackmun's decision revolved around the development of the fetus during pregnancy. He held that during the first trimester, or three months, of a pregnancy, the woman in consultation with her physician had an unrestricted rightto an abortion. During the second trimester, States could regulate abortion to protect a woman's health. Finally, during the third trimester, the State's interest in protecting the potential life of the fetus was sufficient to justify severe restrictions.


Approaching the matter of when life begins, Blackmun was clearly hesitant to commit the Court to any position.


Controversial when announced, the Roe decision remains at the center of the legal controversy over the right to privacy versus the rights of the unborn.


In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1992, the Court reaffirmed Roe's central holding but abandoned its trimester structure. The Court permitted States to require informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, and/or parental notification, but held that States may not place an “undue burden”on a woman's right to an abortion.

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Good, now define undue burden.

 

[Si modo]

I don't understand why ANYONE would be opposed to making a woman view an altrasound before she decides to put the child in the blender..

Funny how Obama can force someone to buy a product, yet forcing an individual to view an altrasound as a prerequisite to having an abortion is somehow "wrong?"

No one is forcing a woman to view an ultrasound in Virginia, asshole.

They ARE forcing it in Texas and pushing for the same in other States... Did you even bother to read the Guttmacher link I've post a half dozen times???



Required for Each Abortion; The Provider Must Display and Describe the Image

http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf



IMO if anything is "evil", that is Evil.

Yet, the bill does not say that the woman must look at the ultrasound. It says the ultrasound is to be offered to the woman. How very evil to offer.

Read the bill.

 

[Si modo]

Fuck off with your repeated snarky condescension, AS IF there's any thing I am incapable of comprehending...

....

Keep trying to deny there is no such thing defensive medicine.

Not what I've posted...



Always sooo desperate to feeel right about SOMEthing, huh?

By a vote of 7-2, with Justices White and Rehnquist in dissent, the Court agreed with Roe and upheld her right to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester (90 days). The Court observed that Section 1 of the 14th Amendment contained three references to “person.” In his majority opinion, Justice Blackmun noted that, for nearly all such references in the Constitution, “use of the word is such that it has application only postnatally. None indicates, with any assurance, that it has any possible prenatal application.”


Blackmun's opinion carefully steered between the right to privacy and the question of compelling State interest. On the first point, he wrote, the majority of the justices “do not agree” with Texas that the State “may override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake.” On the other hand, the State does have an “important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life” and in protecting the mother's health.


Blackmun's decision revolved around the development of the fetus during pregnancy. He held that during the first trimester, or three months, of a pregnancy, the woman in consultation with her physician had an unrestricted rightto an abortion. During the second trimester, States could regulate abortion to protect a woman's health. Finally, during the third trimester, the State's interest in protecting the potential life of the fetus was sufficient to justify severe restrictions.


Approaching the matter of when life begins, Blackmun was clearly hesitant to commit the Court to any position.


Controversial when announced, the Roe decision remains at the center of the legal controversy over the right to privacy versus the rights of the unborn.


In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1992, the Court reaffirmed Roe's central holding but abandoned its trimester structure. The Court permitted States to require informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, and/or parental notification, but held that States may not place an “undue burden”on a woman's right to an abortion.

Roe v. Wade (1973)

So what?

Defensive medicine is practiced, thus an ultrasound is a default test for any physician who wants to keep his/her license in any state that has a cutoff gestational age for an elective abortion. Most states have such a limit for an elective abortion. I wasn't aware that ultrasounds are undue burdens on women. Pregnant women need to get up in arms about all those physicians raping them.

 

[Ravi]

If your intention already is to abort the pregnancy then there is no medical reason to perform the test! This particular medical procedure is a certain type of overly invasive ultrasound and the push for requiring one prior to abortion is by non-medical rationale.

Nope. No medical reason except to keep your malpractice premiums down and ensure your license isn't yanked.

Aaaaand...By what authority should the State be able to yank a Doctor's license for not performing a medical procedure which is not medically necessary...?

I can't think of one.

But I do hope that if a woman thinks she's 12 weeks pregnant and the ultrasound says she's only 5 weeks that the doctor advises her that she can still have an abortion if she wishes.

Because anything else would certainly show what moralistic bullshit this really is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Determining gestational age has nothing to do with it. Laying on additional guilt in the hopes of chasing her away is the sole purpose of the bill

Just like your health care bill.

The phrase how do you like me now comes to mind.

i'm going to hope you're just saying that. because equating having to share the burden of the costs of health care in this country with non-consensual penetration (generally called rape) is fairly nefarious.

it has nothing to do with determining gestational age. it's intended to force women to see pictures so they'll run screaming from the room or be tortured for their choice.

if it were necessary in order to determine gestational age, then doctors would do it. mitch daniels, who wrote the replacement legislation, hasn't a clue about what is necessary. he just knows that he doesn't like the fact that it's a LEGAL procedure. Let me reiterate that, it's LEGAL.

Yes it is, so why do you agree with the people who are equating rape with a consensual medical procedure?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

i'm going to hope you're just saying that. because equating having to share the burden of the costs of health care in this country with non-consensual penetration (generally called rape) is fairly nefarious.

it has nothing to do with determining gestational age. it's intended to force women to see pictures so they'll run screaming from the room or be tortured for their choice.

if it were necessary in order to determine gestational age, then doctors would do it. mitch daniels, who wrote the replacement legislation, hasn't a clue about what is necessary. he just knows that he doesn't like the fact that it's a LEGAL procedure. Let me reiterate that, it's LEGAL.

The thread has been through your nonsense. Graphic pictures might be the intent.

There is no evidence that rape by instrument will occur. If you need the taxpayer dime, because of irresponsibility. I have little to no sympathy.

my nonsense? STFU, you idiot.

rape is defined as penetration without consent.

and we aren't, let me repeat for the brain dead, NOT talking about money, we're talking about a state mandated medical procedure.

now crawl back in your hole.

and thanks for reminding me why we can't have "civil" discussons with nutters.

Does that mean you oppose Obamacare?

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Nope. No medical reason except to keep your malpractice premiums down and ensure your license isn't yanked.

Aaaaand...By what authority should the State be able to yank a Doctor's license for not performing a medical procedure which is not medically necessary...?

I can't think of one.

But I do hope that if a woman thinks she's 12 weeks pregnant and the ultrasound says she's only 5 weeks that the doctor advises her that she can still have an abortion if she wishes.

Because anything else would certainly show what moralistic bullshit this really is.

IF a woman is 5 weeks pregnant when she is only 5 weeks pregnant, I suggest SHE should be terminated for being grossly ignorant.

 

[Valerie]

Keep trying to deny there is no such thing defensive medicine.

Not what I've posted...



Always sooo desperate to feeel right about SOMEthing, huh?

By a vote of 7-2, with Justices White and Rehnquist in dissent, the Court agreed with Roe and upheld her right to terminate a pregnancy in the first trimester (90 days). The Court observed that Section 1 of the 14th Amendment contained three references to “person.” In his majority opinion, Justice Blackmun noted that, for nearly all such references in the Constitution, “use of the word is such that it has application only postnatally. None indicates, with any assurance, that it has any possible prenatal application.”


Blackmun's opinion carefully steered between the right to privacy and the question of compelling State interest. On the first point, he wrote, the majority of the justices “do not agree” with Texas that the State “may override the rights of the pregnant woman that are at stake.” On the other hand, the State does have an “important and legitimate interest in protecting the potentiality of human life” and in protecting the mother's health.


Blackmun's decision revolved around the development of the fetus during pregnancy. He held that during the first trimester, or three months, of a pregnancy, the woman in consultation with her physician had an unrestricted rightto an abortion. During the second trimester, States could regulate abortion to protect a woman's health. Finally, during the third trimester, the State's interest in protecting the potential life of the fetus was sufficient to justify severe restrictions.


Approaching the matter of when life begins, Blackmun was clearly hesitant to commit the Court to any position.


Controversial when announced, the Roe decision remains at the center of the legal controversy over the right to privacy versus the rights of the unborn.


In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 1992, the Court reaffirmed Roe's central holding but abandoned its trimester structure. The Court permitted States to require informed consent, a 24-hour waiting period, and/or parental notification, but held that States may not place an “undue burden”on a woman's right to an abortion.

Roe v. Wade (1973)

Good, now define undue burden.

That's for the court in conjunction with medical professionals to define, which is the crux of the entire issue...



Virginia is just the current State in the headline news with legislation attempting to push this issue, but the argument has been going on for decades.

Currently 7 States require this unnecessary test for ALL abortions regardless of gestation, (which in most cases can be fairly determined in other ways besides State mandated insertion of a camera up a woman's vagina, and in the majority of cases results are prior to those State's 20 week limit anyway).

Texas is the 1 and ONLY State which forces the woman to then view the images, and the 6 other States do not require the woman to look at them...



The VAST MAJORITY of our States do not have any such requirements...



State Abortion Laws:
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf

States Ultrasound Requirements:
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Not what I've posted...



Always sooo desperate to feeel right about SOMEthing, huh?

Good, now define undue burden.

That's for the court in conjunction with medical professionals to define, which is the crux of the entire issue...



Virginia is just the current State in the headline news with legislation attempting to push this issue, but the argument has been going on for decades.

Currently 7 States require this unnecessary test for ALL abortions regardless of gestation, (which in most cases can be fairly determined in other ways besides State mandated insertion of a camera up a woman's vagina, and in the majority of cases results are prior to those State's 20 week limit anyway).

Texas is the 1 and ONLY State which forces the woman to then view the images, and the 6 other States do not require the woman to look at them...



The VAST MAJORITY of our States do not have any such requirements...



State Abortion Laws:
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf

States Ultrasound Requirements:
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf

I think we can safely assume that since the Court ruled in Sitz that a DWI check point is not an unreasonable intrusion upon your rights even though it is a technical intrusion that they have already set the bar pretty high for considering something to be a an undue burden.

 

[Valerie]

Good, now define undue burden.

That's for the court in conjunction with medical professionals to define, which is the crux of the entire issue...



Virginia is just the current State in the headline news with legislation attempting to push this issue, but the argument has been going on for decades.

Currently 7 States require this unnecessary test for ALL abortions regardless of gestation, (which in most cases can be fairly determined in other ways besides State mandated insertion of a camera up a woman's vagina, and in the majority of cases results are prior to those State's 20 week limit anyway).

Texas is the 1 and ONLY State which forces the woman to then view the images, and the 6 other States do not require the woman to look at them...



The VAST MAJORITY of our States do not have any such requirements...



State Abortion Laws:
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf

States Ultrasound Requirements:
http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf

I think we can safely assume that since the Court ruled in Sitz that a DWI check point is not an unreasonable intrusion upon your rights even though it is a technical intrusion that they have already set the bar pretty high for considering something to be a an undue burden.

Well, that 1992 case does not undo Roe v Wade, it just did not reaffirm the trimester structure previously drawn out by Justice Blackmun in 1973.

Blackmun's decision revolved around the development of the fetus during pregnancy. He held that during the first trimester, or three months, of a pregnancy, the woman in consultation with her physician had an unrestricted rightto an abortion. During the second trimester, States could regulate abortion to protect a woman's health. Finally, during the third trimester, the State's interest in protecting the potential life of the fetus was sufficient to justify severe restrictions.

 

[Chris]

When Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell went to Pat Roberston's university he wrote a thesis.

His agenda includes opposition to abortion, privatizing public schools, "covenant marriage", and tax policies that favor heterosexual families over single people and gays. In his thesis, McDonnell wrote "government policy should favor married couples over cohabitators, homosexuals or fornicators." McDonnell described working women as "detrimental" to the family.

It's too bad that voters did not pay attention to this right wing extremist agenda when he was elected, or we would not now be discussing government forced vaginal probes.

 

[Zander]

Planned Parenthood Already "Rapes" Women in Pre-Abortion Ultrasound | LifeNews.com
Planned Parenthood provides the following on a telephone hotline:

“Patients who have a surgical abortion generally come in for two appointments. At the first visit we do a health assessment, perform all the necessary lab work, and do an ultrasound. This visit generally takes about an hour. At the second visit, the procedure takes place. This visit takes about an hour as well. For out of town patients for whom it would be difficult to make two trips to our office, we’re able to schedule both the initial appointment and the procedure on the same day.

Medical abortions generally require three visits. At the first visit, we do a health assessment, perform all the necessary lab work, and do an ultrasound. This visit takes about an hour. At the second visit, the physician gives the first pill and directions for taking two more pills at home. The third visit is required during which you will have an exam and another ultrasound.”

 

[Zander]

Also there is nothing in HB 462 that mandates the use of transvaginal ultrasound rather than abdominal ultrasound.
read it yourself.....LIS > Bill Tracking > HB462 > 2012 session

 

[Valerie]

Also there is nothing in HB 462 that mandates the use of transvaginal ultrasound rather than abdominal ultrasound.
read it yourself.....LIS > Bill Tracking > HB462 > 2012 session

Yes, that is the revised version of the Bill...

The Virginia House of Delegates passed on Wednesday a revised version of a GOP-sponsored informed consent bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before having an abortion. The new bill, which requires women to receive an external, transabdominal ultrasound rather than a more invasive transvaginal ultrasound, passed by a vote of 65-32.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) revoked his support for the original bill just minutes before the House began debate on it, saying that the government did not have the power to require the transvaginal procedure.

"Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state," McDonnell said in a statement. "No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure."

"For this reason ... I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily. I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision," he said.

Virginia House Speaker William Howell (R) said during floor debates on the measure that McDonnell had helped GOP House members amend the bill based on the recommendations in his statement.


Virginia Ultrasound Bill Passes In House [UPDATE]

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Also there is nothing in HB 462 that mandates the use of transvaginal ultrasound rather than abdominal ultrasound.
read it yourself.....LIS > Bill Tracking > HB462 > 2012 session

Yes, that is the revised version of the Bill...

The Virginia House of Delegates passed on Wednesday a revised version of a GOP-sponsored informed consent bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before having an abortion. The new bill, which requires women to receive an external, transabdominal ultrasound rather than a more invasive transvaginal ultrasound, passed by a vote of 65-32.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) revoked his support for the original bill just minutes before the House began debate on it, saying that the government did not have the power to require the transvaginal procedure.

"Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state," McDonnell said in a statement. "No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure."

"For this reason ... I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily. I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision," he said.

Virginia House Speaker William Howell (R) said during floor debates on the measure that McDonnell had helped GOP House members amend the bill based on the recommendations in his statement.


Virginia Ultrasound Bill Passes In House [UPDATE]

Big deal, bills are tweaked and revised all the time, the final copy is all that is important.

 

[Valerie]

Also there is nothing in HB 462 that mandates the use of transvaginal ultrasound rather than abdominal ultrasound.
read it yourself.....LIS > Bill Tracking > HB462 > 2012 session

Yes, that is the revised version of the Bill...

The Virginia House of Delegates passed on Wednesday a revised version of a GOP-sponsored informed consent bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound at least 24 hours before having an abortion. The new bill, which requires women to receive an external, transabdominal ultrasound rather than a more invasive transvaginal ultrasound, passed by a vote of 65-32.

Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) revoked his support for the original bill just minutes before the House began debate on it, saying that the government did not have the power to require the transvaginal procedure.

"Mandating an invasive procedure in order to give informed consent is not a proper role for the state," McDonnell said in a statement. "No person should be directed to undergo an invasive procedure by the state, without their consent, as a precondition to another medical procedure."

"For this reason ... I am requesting that the General Assembly amend this bill to explicitly state that no woman in Virginia will have to undergo a transvaginal ultrasound involuntarily. I am asking the General Assembly to state in this legislation that only a transabdominal, or external, ultrasound will be required to satisfy the requirements to determine gestational age. Should a doctor determine that another form of ultrasound may be necessary to provide the necessary images and information that will be an issue for the doctor and the patient. The government will have no role in that medical decision," he said.

Virginia House Speaker William Howell (R) said during floor debates on the measure that McDonnell had helped GOP House members amend the bill based on the recommendations in his statement.


Virginia Ultrasound Bill Passes In House [UPDATE]

I'm so sure Snarktimonious Si will be along any moment now to tell the Virginia Legislature to "wake up" and "pay attention" cuz she is "not so sure {they} can figure out" that issue is merely doctors practicing "defensive medicine".