"The [abortion] law has created torture."

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

[Anonymous]

These anti-abortion laws aren't about protecting anyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

There’s only so much morphine you can give a person before it’s fatal, and that’s not technically allowed either. Air hunger is perhaps the most primal urge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction. [/quote

Undoubtedly they did, but that's a very short amount of time to deal with titrating pain med doses through progressive stages of death

-Healthcare worker

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

I know you don’t understand. Which is why perhaps we should leave it to the healthcare workers who do understand? Rather than people who get their MDs on right wing websites?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

The suffering is the point. These bills are to show who is in charge. They are fascist. End stop. Providing pain management to this baby who was FORCED to be born is an asinine solution to a problem that didn’t have to be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

The suffering is the point. These bills are to show who is in charge. They are fascist. End stop. Providing pain management to this baby who was FORCED to be born is an asinine solution to a problem that didn’t have to be.

Agreed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

He. Milo.

You could say it when she wanted to terminate after finding out the baby wouldn’t survive. They forced her to carry to term and give birth to a baby that would live 99 minutes to watch him struggle and die. They also had to pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege of watching their son die.

Let’s not sanitize or dehumanize Milo’s death or the family’s experience and pretend it wasn’t traumatic or preventable. Let’s not pretend the family or doctors were cruel because they couldn’t give him a pain free (albeit short) life. That’s why she wanted to terminate in the first place. To prevent her son from experiencing that pain, to prevent herself and her family from having to watch him suffer through it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why the baby had to suffer for 99 minutes. With all the pain management available today, couldn’t they have given it something to take away the pain. Even if it was stoned completely out of its mind, if you knew it was dying anyway, you wouldn’t have to worry about long term brain damage or addiction.

He. Milo.

You could say it when she wanted to terminate after finding out the baby wouldn’t survive. They forced her to carry to term and give birth to a baby that would live 99 minutes to watch him struggle and die. They also had to pay tens of thousands of dollars for the privilege of watching their son die.

Let’s not sanitize or dehumanize Milo’s death or the family’s experience and pretend it wasn’t traumatic or preventable. Let’s not pretend the family or doctors were cruel because they couldn’t give him a pain free (albeit short) life. That’s why she wanted to terminate in the first place. To prevent her son from experiencing that pain, to prevent herself and her family from having to watch him suffer through it.

Indeed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m really not interested in hearing what a father thinks. Why is he speaking for the mother? Why don’t he let her speak for herself?

Because she could have left to get the abortion. Because people raised money for the family to do so. Because they chose not to.

That wasn’t in this article.

It was in previous articles. Sorry your sources are poor reporters of the truth

1. The couple worried they could be arrested if they sought an out of state abortion and voiced concern about ensuring they could be there for their existing child
2. How sad of a world we are in that a woman would have to travel out of state for ethically appropriate healthcare

Take your kid with you. And fear about arrest is made up leftist crap

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These anti-abortion laws aren't about protecting anyone.

Jenna knows all

[Anonymous]

F*** DeSantis!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m really not interested in hearing what a father thinks. Why is he speaking for the mother? Why don’t he let her speak for herself?

Because she could have left to get the abortion. Because people raised money for the family to do so. Because they chose not to.

That wasn’t in this article.

It was in previous articles. Sorry your sources are poor reporters of the truth

1. The couple worried they could be arrested if they sought an out of state abortion and voiced concern about ensuring they could be there for their existing child
2. How sad of a world we are in that a woman would have to travel out of state for ethically appropriate healthcare

Take your kid with you. And fear about arrest is made up leftist crap

Why should a woman need to leave the state for ethically appropriate healthcare?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m really not interested in hearing what a father thinks. Why is he speaking for the mother? Why don’t he let her speak for herself?

Because she could have left to get the abortion. Because people raised money for the family to do so. Because they chose not to.

That wasn’t in this article.

It was in previous articles. Sorry your sources are poor reporters of the truth

1. The couple worried they could be arrested if they sought an out of state abortion and voiced concern about ensuring they could be there for their existing child
2. How sad of a world we are in that a woman would have to travel out of state for ethically appropriate healthcare

Take your kid with you. And fear about arrest is made up leftist crap

If it's made up leftist crap then why not write into the law that anyone leaving the state to get an abortion will not be charged? Tell us why that couldn't be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m really not interested in hearing what a father thinks. Why is he speaking for the mother? Why don’t he let her speak for herself?

Maybe if men speak up more men will listen. You know, in a government which is 99% male.