Roe v Wade struck down

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well my Catholic sister in law fertilized all her embryos and has 4 in the bank. She keeps
Voting R down the ballot and I hope she wakes up soon.

Unless she lives in a deep red state she will be fine. I'm sure she's like, F those women living in red states, serves them right, eh?

Yes a red state.
You guys don’t get it. Plenty of women don’t have a clue what their rights were, what they are now, and what they will become.
and there is an entire “conservative” media ecosystem keeping them in the dark.
And I’ve tried to explain it to her, but she just doesn’t get it.

.."if you vote for trump then he will not protect your right to have IVF and you will not have IVF in your state"

This is an easy concept. I think the voters are capable of understanding it.

I’ve literally used those exact words.
She and her husband are like….”nah. We are good people and it’s not about us. Also: taxes”
I know it’s insane and enraging. I understand. I’m only typing it here so you all can understand. There are people that won’t get it until something happens to them personally. They won’t even get it, if it happens to friend or family member.
There are people who do IVF and still don’t really understand reproduction and the science involved. It’s maddening.

Deep breath PP. You can't control what other people say or do. You have said your peace. She won't change, ever.

What you can do is work to get persuadable or checked-out voters to understand the consequences and get them to cancel her vote.

There is hope. There's currently a woman running in a Special election for Alabama house. She is a pro-choice Christian woman running to push back on Alabama's no-acceptions abortion ban. I've spoken with members of her church. Not all "good, southern Christians" are anti-abortion. We need to support these candidates and forget ppl like your SIL.

Consider contributing to her campaign. Polls have her ahead! A Democrat winning in deep red Alabama provides a permission structure for others to follow.
Website: https://www.marilynlands.com/

Thank you posting this. I have taken a deep breath and more importantly, I chipped in to her campaign.

Good on ya!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well my Catholic sister in law fertilized all her embryos and has 4 in the bank. She keeps
Voting R down the ballot and I hope she wakes up soon.

Unless she lives in a deep red state she will be fine. I'm sure she's like, F those women living in red states, serves them right, eh?

Yes a red state.
You guys don’t get it. Plenty of women don’t have a clue what their rights were, what they are now, and what they will become.
and there is an entire “conservative” media ecosystem keeping them in the dark.
And I’ve tried to explain it to her, but she just doesn’t get it.

.."if you vote for trump then he will not protect your right to have IVF and you will not have IVF in your state"

This is an easy concept. I think the voters are capable of understanding it.

I’ve literally used those exact words.
She and her husband are like….”nah. We are good people and it’s not about us. Also: taxes”
I know it’s insane and enraging. I understand. I’m only typing it here so you all can understand. There are people that won’t get it until something happens to them personally. They won’t even get it, if it happens to friend or family member.
There are people who do IVF and still don’t really understand reproduction and the science involved. It’s maddening.

Deep breath PP. You can't control what other people say or do. You have said your peace. She won't change, ever.

What you can do is work to get persuadable or checked-out voters to understand the consequences and get them to cancel her vote.

There is hope. There's currently a woman running in a Special election for Alabama house. She is a pro-choice Christian woman running to push back on Alabama's no-acceptions abortion ban. I've spoken with members of her church. Not all "good, southern Christians" are anti-abortion. We need to support these candidates and forget ppl like your SIL.

Consider contributing to her campaign. Polls have her ahead! A Democrat winning in deep red Alabama provides a permission structure for others to follow.
Website: https://www.marilynlands.com/

Thank you posting this. I have taken a deep breath and more importantly, I chipped in to her campaign.

PP here. Awesome! Together we will crush the Christofascist MAGA movement.

[Anonymous]

Meanwhile, here's an analysis of the devastation that Catholic hospitals have on women's health because of their refusal to treat life-threatening situations and offer sterilization surgeries. Essentially, the local bishop is determining what health care you receive if you are a woman going to a Catholic hospital. And it doesn't matter if you are in a state that allows abortion, if the only hospital within an hour from you is Catholic.

This also has an effect on end-of-life-care, by the way. But that's another story.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/02/17/catholic-hospitals-leave-patients-at-the-mercy-of-religious-directives/72634772007/

Nurse midwife Beverly Maldonado recalls a pregnant woman arriving at Ascension Saint Agnes Hospital in Maryland after her water broke. It was weeks before the baby would have any chance of survival, and the patient’s wishes were clear, she recalled: “Why am I staying pregnant then? What’s the point?” the patient pleaded.

But the doctors couldn’t intervene, she said. The fetus still had a heartbeat and it was a Catholic hospital, subject to the “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services” that prohibit or limit procedures like abortion that the church deems “immoral” or “intrinsically evil,” according to its interpretation of the Bible.

“I remember asking the doctors. And they were like, ‘Well, the baby still has a heartbeat. We can’t do anything,’” said Maldonado, now working as a nurse midwife in California, who asked them: "What do you mean we can’t do anything? This baby’s not going to survive.”

More and more women are running into barriers to obtaining care as Catholic health systems have aggressively acquired secular hospitals in much of the country. Four of the 10 largest U.S. hospital chains by number of beds are Catholic, according to federal data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. There are just over 600 Catholic general hospitals nationally and roughly 100 more managed by Catholic chains that place some religious limits on care, a KFF Health News investigation reveals.

Nationally, nearly 800,000 people have only Catholic or Catholic-affiliated birth hospitals within an hour’s drive, according to KFF Health News’ analysis. For example, that’s true of 1 in 10 North Dakotans. In South Dakota, it’s 1 in 20. When care is more than an hour away, academic researchers often define the area as a hospital desert. Pregnant women who must drive farther to a delivery facility are at higher risk of harm to themselves or their fetus, research shows.

Many Americans don’t have a choice — non-Catholic hospitals are too far to reach in an emergency or aren’t in their insurance networks. Ambulances may take patients to a Catholic facility without giving them a say. Women often don’t know that hospitals are affiliated with the Catholic Church or that they restrict reproductive care, academic research suggests.

How strictly directives are followed can depend on the hospital and the views of the local bishop.

Katherine Parker Bryden, a nurse midwife in Iowa who works for MercyOne, said she regularly tells pregnant patients that the hospital cannot perform tubal sterilization surgery, to prevent future pregnancies, or refer patients to other hospitals that do. MercyOne is one of the largest health systems in Iowa. Nearly half of general hospitals in the state are Catholic or Catholic-affiliated — the highest share among all states.

The National Catholic Bioethics Center, an ethics authority for Catholic health institutions, has said that referrals for care that go against church teaching would be “immoral.”

“As providers, you’re put in this kind of moral dilemma,” Parker Bryden said. “Am I serving my patients or am I serving the archbishop and the pope?”

Annie Iriye, a retired OB-GYN in Washington state, said that more than a decade ago she sought permission to administer medication to hasten labor for a patient experiencing a second-trimester miscarriage at a Catholic hospital. She said she was told no because the fetus had a heartbeat. The patient took 10 hours to deliver — time that would have been cut by half, Iriye said, had she been able to follow her own medical training and expertise. During that time, she said, the patient developed an infection.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meanwhile, here's an analysis of the devastation that Catholic hospitals have on women's health because of their refusal to treat life-threatening situations and offer sterilization surgeries. Essentially, the local bishop is determining what health care you receive if you are a woman going to a Catholic hospital. And it doesn't matter if you are in a state that allows abortion, if the only hospital within an hour from you is Catholic.

This also has an effect on end-of-life-care, by the way. But that's another story.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/02/17/catholic-hospitals-leave-patients-at-the-mercy-of-religious-directives/72634772007/

Nurse midwife Beverly Maldonado recalls a pregnant woman arriving at Ascension Saint Agnes Hospital in Maryland after her water broke. It was weeks before the baby would have any chance of survival, and the patient’s wishes were clear, she recalled: “Why am I staying pregnant then? What’s the point?” the patient pleaded.

But the doctors couldn’t intervene, she said. The fetus still had a heartbeat and it was a Catholic hospital, subject to the “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services” that prohibit or limit procedures like abortion that the church deems “immoral” or “intrinsically evil,” according to its interpretation of the Bible.

“I remember asking the doctors. And they were like, ‘Well, the baby still has a heartbeat. We can’t do anything,’” said Maldonado, now working as a nurse midwife in California, who asked them: "What do you mean we can’t do anything? This baby’s not going to survive.”

More and more women are running into barriers to obtaining care as Catholic health systems have aggressively acquired secular hospitals in much of the country. Four of the 10 largest U.S. hospital chains by number of beds are Catholic, according to federal data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. There are just over 600 Catholic general hospitals nationally and roughly 100 more managed by Catholic chains that place some religious limits on care, a KFF Health News investigation reveals.

Nationally, nearly 800,000 people have only Catholic or Catholic-affiliated birth hospitals within an hour’s drive, according to KFF Health News’ analysis. For example, that’s true of 1 in 10 North Dakotans. In South Dakota, it’s 1 in 20. When care is more than an hour away, academic researchers often define the area as a hospital desert. Pregnant women who must drive farther to a delivery facility are at higher risk of harm to themselves or their fetus, research shows.

Many Americans don’t have a choice — non-Catholic hospitals are too far to reach in an emergency or aren’t in their insurance networks. Ambulances may take patients to a Catholic facility without giving them a say. Women often don’t know that hospitals are affiliated with the Catholic Church or that they restrict reproductive care, academic research suggests.

How strictly directives are followed can depend on the hospital and the views of the local bishop.

Katherine Parker Bryden, a nurse midwife in Iowa who works for MercyOne, said she regularly tells pregnant patients that the hospital cannot perform tubal sterilization surgery, to prevent future pregnancies, or refer patients to other hospitals that do. MercyOne is one of the largest health systems in Iowa. Nearly half of general hospitals in the state are Catholic or Catholic-affiliated — the highest share among all states.

The National Catholic Bioethics Center, an ethics authority for Catholic health institutions, has said that referrals for care that go against church teaching would be “immoral.”

“As providers, you’re put in this kind of moral dilemma,” Parker Bryden said. “Am I serving my patients or am I serving the archbishop and the pope?”

Annie Iriye, a retired OB-GYN in Washington state, said that more than a decade ago she sought permission to administer medication to hasten labor for a patient experiencing a second-trimester miscarriage at a Catholic hospital. She said she was told no because the fetus had a heartbeat. The patient took 10 hours to deliver — time that would have been cut by half, Iriye said, had she been able to follow her own medical training and expertise. During that time, she said, the patient developed an infection.

Religion needs to be gotten out of medical care entirely. If you want to pray, fine, but don’t have a bishop determining who gets healthcare according to their beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meanwhile, here's an analysis of the devastation that Catholic hospitals have on women's health because of their refusal to treat life-threatening situations and offer sterilization surgeries. Essentially, the local bishop is determining what health care you receive if you are a woman going to a Catholic hospital. And it doesn't matter if you are in a state that allows abortion, if the only hospital within an hour from you is Catholic.

This also has an effect on end-of-life-care, by the way. But that's another story.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/02/17/catholic-hospitals-leave-patients-at-the-mercy-of-religious-directives/72634772007/

Nurse midwife Beverly Maldonado recalls a pregnant woman arriving at Ascension Saint Agnes Hospital in Maryland after her water broke. It was weeks before the baby would have any chance of survival, and the patient’s wishes were clear, she recalled: “Why am I staying pregnant then? What’s the point?” the patient pleaded.

But the doctors couldn’t intervene, she said. The fetus still had a heartbeat and it was a Catholic hospital, subject to the “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services” that prohibit or limit procedures like abortion that the church deems “immoral” or “intrinsically evil,” according to its interpretation of the Bible.

“I remember asking the doctors. And they were like, ‘Well, the baby still has a heartbeat. We can’t do anything,’” said Maldonado, now working as a nurse midwife in California, who asked them: "What do you mean we can’t do anything? This baby’s not going to survive.”

More and more women are running into barriers to obtaining care as Catholic health systems have aggressively acquired secular hospitals in much of the country. Four of the 10 largest U.S. hospital chains by number of beds are Catholic, according to federal data from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. There are just over 600 Catholic general hospitals nationally and roughly 100 more managed by Catholic chains that place some religious limits on care, a KFF Health News investigation reveals.

Nationally, nearly 800,000 people have only Catholic or Catholic-affiliated birth hospitals within an hour’s drive, according to KFF Health News’ analysis. For example, that’s true of 1 in 10 North Dakotans. In South Dakota, it’s 1 in 20. When care is more than an hour away, academic researchers often define the area as a hospital desert. Pregnant women who must drive farther to a delivery facility are at higher risk of harm to themselves or their fetus, research shows.

Many Americans don’t have a choice — non-Catholic hospitals are too far to reach in an emergency or aren’t in their insurance networks. Ambulances may take patients to a Catholic facility without giving them a say. Women often don’t know that hospitals are affiliated with the Catholic Church or that they restrict reproductive care, academic research suggests.

How strictly directives are followed can depend on the hospital and the views of the local bishop.

Katherine Parker Bryden, a nurse midwife in Iowa who works for MercyOne, said she regularly tells pregnant patients that the hospital cannot perform tubal sterilization surgery, to prevent future pregnancies, or refer patients to other hospitals that do. MercyOne is one of the largest health systems in Iowa. Nearly half of general hospitals in the state are Catholic or Catholic-affiliated — the highest share among all states.

The National Catholic Bioethics Center, an ethics authority for Catholic health institutions, has said that referrals for care that go against church teaching would be “immoral.”

“As providers, you’re put in this kind of moral dilemma,” Parker Bryden said. “Am I serving my patients or am I serving the archbishop and the pope?”

Annie Iriye, a retired OB-GYN in Washington state, said that more than a decade ago she sought permission to administer medication to hasten labor for a patient experiencing a second-trimester miscarriage at a Catholic hospital. She said she was told no because the fetus had a heartbeat. The patient took 10 hours to deliver — time that would have been cut by half, Iriye said, had she been able to follow her own medical training and expertise. During that time, she said, the patient developed an infection.

Religion needs to be gotten out of medical care entirely. If you want to pray, fine, but don’t have a bishop determining who gets healthcare according to their beliefs.

Catholic teaching regarding reproduction is best ignored. It is clueless. I wouldn't even have my family if I listened to their anti - IVF nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Can someone speak to why the Catholic Church has moved to aggressively acquire so many hospitals?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone speak to why the Catholic Church has moved to aggressively acquire so many hospitals?

To control more women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone speak to why the Catholic Church has moved to aggressively acquire so many hospitals?

I don't know but hospitals are not money-making or successful and many are at risk of closure. The reason the Catholic church and other churches run hospitals is because they are charities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone speak to why the Catholic Church has moved to aggressively acquire so many hospitals?

I don't know but hospitals are not money-making or successful and many are at risk of closure. The reason the Catholic church and other churches run hospitals is because they are charities.

This is true but if Jehovahs Witnesses ran hospitals and they refused to allow blood transfusions because that is against their religion there would be a riot especially if their hospital were the only one within an hour’s drive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone speak to why the Catholic Church has moved to aggressively acquire so many hospitals?

I don't know but hospitals are not money-making or successful and many are at risk of closure. The reason the Catholic church and other churches run hospitals is because they are charities.

This is true but if Jehovahs Witnesses ran hospitals and they refused to allow blood transfusions because that is against their religion there would be a riot especially if their hospital were the only one within an hour’s drive.

Yes, because that would affect men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone speak to why the Catholic Church has moved to aggressively acquire so many hospitals?

I don't know but hospitals are not money-making or successful and many are at risk of closure. The reason the Catholic church and other churches run hospitals is because they are charities.

Bull. The bills aren’t any smaller at Catholic hospitals.

[Anonymous]

Alabama Supreme Court rules frozen embryos are ‘children' under state law

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/alabama-supreme-court-rules-frozen-embryos-are-children-under-state-law/3548169/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_DCBrand

So if it's any consolation, then can women claim all of their frozen embryos as dependents on their tax return?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Alabama Supreme Court rules frozen embryos are ‘children' under state law

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/alabama-supreme-court-rules-frozen-embryos-are-children-under-state-law/3548169/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_DCBrand

So if it's any consolation, then can women claim all of their frozen embryos as dependents on their tax return?

It is the beginning of the end for IVF in Alabama and likely other red states. Of course this would happen after Dobbs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Alabama Supreme Court rules frozen embryos are ‘children' under state law

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/national-international/alabama-supreme-court-rules-frozen-embryos-are-children-under-state-law/3548169/?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_DCBrand

So if it's any consolation, then can women claim all of their frozen embryos as dependents on their tax return?

It is the beginning of the end for IVF in Alabama and likely other red states. Of course this would happen after Dobbs.

To all those of you reading but not participating, those of you who sincerely believed that the GOP would never actually go there, I see your regret, I appreciate that you have seen the error of your ways and I ask that, going forward, you do the utmost to get Democrats into office.

[Anonymous]

A forced birthers calls out all the ways that forced birthers fail to take care of children - and fetuses. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/02/20/republicans-prenatal-care-pro-life/

She’s not wrong about the complete failures by the GOP.