Another young woman falls victim to GOP abortion laws. RIP

[toomuchtime_]

Really?



Source: Texas Tribune.

According to the article in the OP, the doctors hesitated in removing the fetus because they were confused about what constituted a medical emergency. A doctor who doesn't understand what a medical emergency is should lose his license.

 

[toomuchtime_]

A woman is dead and somebody has to be blamed and held accountable. The plaintiff will try to hold the state of Texas accountable. That's the master plan.

Hardly a master plan, more like a propaganda stunt. Since the law allowed the doctors to remove the fetus in a medical emergency, there is no logical argument to be made that the law caused her death.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

According to the article in the OP, the doctors hesitated in removing the fetus because they were confused about what constituted a medical emergency. A doctor who doesn't understand what a medical emergency is should lose his license.

Why do you think they were "confused"? There was no confusion, there was uncertainty a very different concept altogether.

At the time of Barnica’s miscarriage in 2021, the Supreme Court had not yet overturned the constitutional right to terminate a pregnancy. But Texas lawmakers, intent on being the first to enact a ban with teeth, had already passed a harsh civil law using a novel legal strategy that circumvented Roe v. Wade: It prohibited doctors from performing an abortion after six weeks by giving members of the public incentives to sue doctors for $10,000 judgments. The bounty also applied to anyone who “aided and abetted” an abortion.

A year later, after the Dobbs v. Jackson ruling was handed down, an even stricter criminal law went into effect, threatening doctors with up to 99 years in prison and $100,000 in fines.

It's easy for you to be glib since you are not at risk. The problem never used to exist, it has been created by insane nationalists. They could have left it alone, they didn't and this is the fallout.

 

[martybegan]

Why do you think they were "confused"? There was no confusion, there was uncertainty a very different concept altogether.



It's easy for you to be glib since you are not at risk.

That's why the hospitals have lawyers and insurance.

Do you really think the abortion restrictions people want a fight over an emergency situation unless it's clearly a made up one?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Really?



Source: Texas Tribune.

Any practicing physician who doesn't understand what a medical emergency is should lose his license.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

That's why the hospitals have lawyers and insurance.

And that's why the decided to not perform the abortion.

Do you really think the abortion restrictions people want a fight over an emergency situation unless it's clearly a made up one?

Show me the definition of "emergency" in this legislation.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

Any practicing physician who doesn't understand what a medical emergency is should lose his license.

Where is the definition - in law - of "emergency"?

 

[Arlette]

Hardly a master plan, more like a propaganda stunt. Since the law allowed the doctors to remove the fetus in a medical emergency, there is no logical argument to be made that the law caused her death.

That's not stopping us from making the argument. Let's see what a jury buys, huh?

 

[martybegan]

And that's why the decided to not perform the abortion.

Show me the definition of "emergency" in this legislation.

show me the definition of health in NY's abortion law that allows for abortion to the last second, and even then 1 doctor has to be OK with it.

Saying something is an emergency is pretty clean cut, don't do something, the woman dies.

 

[Zincwarrior]

They didn't have to. Malpractice on the part of the Doctors.

Except that doctors in Texas asked the Medical Board to better define the conditions and the Medical Board refused. The law is badly written on purpose.

According to the article in the OP, the doctors hesitated in removing the fetus because they were confused about what constituted a medical emergency. A doctor who doesn't understand what a medical emergency is should lose his license.

the legal definition, not the medical one.

And that's why the decided to not perform the abortion.

Show me the definition of "emergency" in this legislation.

Exactly. Thats the issue. Its intentional.

 

[westwall]

Really?



Source: Texas Tribune.

The ACTUAL law is posted above. Try reading that instead of a politically biased opinion.

 

[martybegan]

Except that doctors in Texas asked the Medical Board to better define the conditions and the Medical Board refused. The law is badly written on purpose.

the legal definition, not the medical one.

Exactly. Thats the issue. Its intentional.

you have evidence of that, because they have Stated emergencies are not covered by the 2 doctor requirement.

Meanwhile you don't care that the NY abortion law allowing viable fetuses to be aborted to the last second if the health of the mother is at risk isn't defined at all.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Why do you think they were "confused"? There was no confusion, there was uncertainty a very different concept altogether.



It's easy for you to be glib since you are not at risk. The problem never used to exist, it has been created by insane nationalists. They could have left it alone, they didn't and this is the fallout.

All bullshit. This is just a clumsy attempt by pro abortionists to twist the facts of this incident into propaganda against the law.

 

[Arlette]

All bullshit. This is just a clumsy attempt by pro abortionists to twist the facts of this incident into propaganda against the law.

She died for our cause. The dead woman wants us to do this.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

show me the definition of health in NY's abortion law that allows for abortion to the last second, and even then 1 doctor has to be OK with it.

We were discussing Texas.

Saying something is an emergency is pretty clean cut, don't do something, the woman dies.

The law (SB00008F) does not define or give examples of what is meant by "emergency" therefore during a trial it would be a matter of interpretation. If the state presented an expert witness who contradicted the doctor's categorization of "emergency" he goes to prison for 99 years.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

All bullshit. This is just a clumsy attempt by pro abortionists to twist the facts of this incident into propaganda against the law.

If the doctors truly felt the law was on their side they'd not be seeking to create propaganda because the law would already be on their side and there'd be no issue. So what motive can you dream up that would motivate a doctor to get permission to do something he is already allowed to do?

You are not thinking logically.

The only logical way to understand this case is to accept that the law truly is ambiguous and doctors truly are terrified of being prosecuted.

 

[ShahdagMountains]

If the doctors truly felt the law was on their side they'd not be seeking to create propaganda because the law would already be on their side and there'd be no issue. So what motive can you dream up that would motivate a doctor to do something he is already allowed to do?

You are not thinking logically.

The only logical way to understand this case is to accept that the law truly is ambiguous.

You’re just as annoying on here as elsewhere.

 

[Sherlock Holmes]

You’re just as annoying on here as elsewhere.

And you're just as shallow here as elsewhere, whining but never able to argue back, state her case, just whine and rant.

You're annoyed because you're stupid.

 

[martybegan]

We were discussing Texas.

The law (SB00008F) does not define or give examples of what is meant by "emergency" therefore during a trial it would be a matter of interpretation. If the state presented an expert witness who contradicted the doctor's categorization of "emergency" he goes to prison for 99 years.

And Texas's law is far more explicit than NY's, but you won't care about NY's because you favor abortion for any reason to the last second.

What laws do give examples like you are asking for?

Once again, you approve of putting politics over lives, "If we want to get rid of the law, some of these women have to die"

 

[toomuchtime_]

That's not stopping us from making the argument. Let's see what a jury buys, huh?

What jury? Who are you going to sue? The law has already been tested in Texas courts several times and it still stands, and since Roe v Wade no longer exists, federal courts have no jurisdiction, so the only way to get rid of it is through the legislature, which is why proponents of looser abortion laws are pulling this stunt.