"The [abortion] law has created torture."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

"Take your kid with you" says the person who has never found themselves in such a situation. It's reactions like yours that confirm to us sane people that conservatives do not give a f*** about real people and real lives. Also no one believes you truly care about babies, either.

Why can’t they? And they clearly have supportive friends and family, so they can’t find someone to watch their child? I’ve had to cart three children everywhere because my leftist husband wants to ride his bike all the time, and take ski vacations with friends. Ever have to cart three little kids and two dogs in two feet of snow to hotels due to a multi-day power outage? I have. Sucks but I did it.

We really need to compile your posts one day. I don’t know how you deal with your “leftist” husband. Such a cross to bear.

Can’t refute my points, so you resort to personal attacks. Got it.

Truth: money was raised for them by supportive friends to go out of state. They chose not to, due to whatever fears and reasons they had. She was second trimester and certainly could have done so. Now I’m getting “maybe she had a travel fear, etc”. The other poster brought up a good point about helping to alleviate the baby’s pain and got attacked. Seems like this thread is an agenda, and not true caring.

[Anonymous]

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 politicians and the SCOTUS don’t care to hear women. We are second class citizens in their eyes.

So really, the goal is to get judges thrown off the court and replaced with judges you approve of?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Why is it not allowed? It is allowed for elderly hospice patients. This baby was in the same situation.

OMFG. If you’re going to recommend she kill the baby after he’s born, why not let her terminate the pregnancy before she’s had to deal with the trauma of delivering a baby to die? Why are you promoting euthanasia for babies but not supporting abortion as healthcare?

NP. The baby isn’t being killed. The baby is dying on its own and the pp is suggesting that the child be given meds so that it’s not as traumatic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

+1
It also puts the healthcare of women in the remaining free states at risk. There aren’t that many obstetricians to go around.

Anyone traveling to a state where abortion is still legal needs to show their voting record. If they voted GOP, nope, no taking services. You bought the ticket, you take the ride.

On the other hand, if this woman’s family starts voting for pro life candidates, that could be a lot of people changing sides. Milo’s parents, her parents, her 6 siblings, their spouses. That’s almost 20 people without getting into extended family, church, or friends. This is how change happens. Unfortunately because of republicans, a lot of babies are going to have to die, families will go into debt to pay for hospital bills that shouldn’t have been needed, some women will lose their fertility and lives along the way, and it’s going to break families apart with the stress of dying children, debt, and grief. But they will have won for a little while.

It may cause some people to change sides, but I doubt it. I have many prolifers in my own family who would stare down this kind of suffering, explain it away as God’s plan and good for them leaving open the possibility for a miracle, and then go right on back to the same crap way of voting. They don’t want to hear that they forced avoidable suffering on their loved ones. They don’t want to take accountability for they’ve done and what they supported.

They are all just “innocent Germans” who only cared about the economy.

Omg yes, this. I know all the same people, sadly.

Unfortunately. Abortion is also a violent procedure

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Why is it not allowed? It is allowed for elderly hospice patients. This baby
was in the same situation.

Have you ever tried to insert a needle in a tiny baby’s vein?

Pro choice person who wishes this woman could have gotten the actual healthcare she needed (and the pp who pointed out that there is only so much morphine you can give before it’s a fatal dose): it’s likely that Milo was given morphine. NICU nurses and doctors exist after all and find tiny veins all the time. But this was a newborn with the life drive of a newborn (even though he was fatally sick). Short of a fatal dose or morphine, I think he would keep gasping like he did.

Horrifying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

+1
It also puts the healthcare of women in the remaining free states at risk. There aren’t that many obstetricians to go around.

Anyone traveling to a state where abortion is still legal needs to show their voting record. If they voted GOP, nope, no taking services. You bought the ticket, you take the ride.

On the other hand, if this woman’s family starts voting for pro life candidates, that could be a lot of people changing sides. Milo’s parents, her parents, her 6 siblings, their spouses. That’s almost 20 people without getting into extended family, church, or friends. This is how change happens. Unfortunately because of republicans, a lot of babies are going to have to die, families will go into debt to pay for hospital bills that shouldn’t have been needed, some women will lose their fertility and lives along the way, and it’s going to break families apart with the stress of dying children, debt, and grief. But they will have won for a little while.

It may cause some people to change sides, but I doubt it. I have many prolifers in my own family who would stare down this kind of suffering, explain it away as God’s plan and good for them leaving open the possibility for a miracle, and then go right on back to the same crap way of voting. They don’t want to hear that they forced avoidable suffering on their loved ones. They don’t want to take accountability for they’ve done and what they supported.

They are all just “innocent Germans” who only cared about the economy.

Omg yes, this. I know all the same people, sadly.

Unfortunately. Abortion is also a violent procedure

So don’t have one. But here you have forced a sadistic torture on a family because you think everyone should have to follow your medieval beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

"Take your kid with you" says the person who has never found themselves in such a situation. It's reactions like yours that confirm to us sane people that conservatives do not give a f*** about real people and real lives. Also no one believes you truly care about babies, either.

Why can’t they? And they clearly have supportive friends and family, so they can’t find someone to watch their child? I’ve had to cart three children everywhere because my leftist husband wants to ride his bike all the time, and take ski vacations with friends. Ever have to cart three little kids and two dogs in two feet of snow to hotels due to a multi-day power outage? I have. Sucks but I did it.

Where could she go to get a 24 week pregnancy induced to deliver? Do you know? Do you know how easy it is to go to a different ob-gyn at that stage and say, hey, induce me, the baby is doomed? What is your own personal experience with being induced by an out-of-state doctor at that stage to terminate a pregnancy?

Abortions laws and anti-abortion whackos across the country have reduced the number of clinics that take patients entering the third trimester. Don't believe me? Go do some of your own research and report back to us.

Her own Florida doctors were sure as hell not going to advise her on where to go make an appointment to get the health care she needed because they wouldn't want to be sued for aiding in an abortion. So where do you think someone who is not a medical professional but needs medical counseling should go to get counseling on something as significant for her health as this?

Also get this: Florida's law redefines "gestation" from "between fertilization and birth" to "as calculated from the first day of the pregnant woman's last menstrual period." So if you are like many women and have irregular periods, you could be defined as being 3 months pregnant or more just because you hadn't had a period in that long. Even if your pregnancy is only a week old. That's what happens when men, especially who are not doctors, are legislating about women's health. It's stupid but that represents today's GOP's level of intelligence.

Colorado, California. There’s two. New York and New Jersey as well. What about MD?

Name the actual clinics not just the states. You don’t just fly to California and say “I’m here for my 3rd trimester abortion!”

Again showing you don’t have the generosity of spirit to imagine someone else’s experience as being different from your own perfection. Do you even know how easy it is for her husband or her to get time off from work was? Do you know how experienced they are as travelers and how debilitating fear of travel to new places can be for some people? Of course you don’t because in your perfection you can’t imagine how others can be less than.

Second trimester. Math matters. And now you are just making stuff up

The diagnosis was confirmed at 24 weeks. By the time they would have located a clinic that would take them, secured the funds needed, made arrangements for their son, gotten time off work, it would have been 3rd trimester.

Empathy matters. Imagining others’ lives matters. Are you as cruel and cold hearted in real life as you seem here?

How do you know that? You don’t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

Why is it not allowed? It is allowed for elderly hospice patients. This baby was in the same situation.

OMFG. If you’re going to recommend she kill the baby after he’s born, why not let her terminate the pregnancy before she’s had to deal with the trauma of delivering a baby to die? Why are you promoting euthanasia for babies but not supporting abortion as healthcare?

NP. The baby isn’t being killed. The baby is dying on its own and the pp is suggesting that the child be given meds so that it’s not as traumatic.

Dp- very likely the child was given compassionate care, and it still suffered.
Very likely meds were administered and this was the best outcome possible.

[Anonymous]

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 politicians and the SCOTUS don’t care to hear women. We are second class citizens in their eyes.

So really, the goal is to get judges thrown off the court and replaced with judges you approve of?

Dp- I think the goal is to get judges that don’t accept bribes and don’t lie under oath. It’s not a super high bar, yet we have a handful of justices that can’t clear it.

[Anonymous]

From a woman’s center in Florida:

ABORTION IS LEGAL IN FLORIDA!

We are open and legally seeing patients for abortion care. The State of Florida enacted a 24-hour waiting period for abortions effective April 25, 2022 and a 15-week abortion ban effective July 1, 2022.

In compliance with these laws:

All patients are required to have an in-person consultation with a Physician a minimum of 24 hours prior to all abortion services. We understand the challenges this law causes, and we will do everything possible to schedule your appointments with minimal inconvenience.
In compliance with the 15-week ban, we provide surgical abortions to 15.0 weeks. The non-surgical option is available to 11.0 weeks.
If you are over 15 weeks in the pregnancy, we can assist you with scheduling your appointment with a trusted out-of-State abortion provider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

"Take your kid with you" says the person who has never found themselves in such a situation. It's reactions like yours that confirm to us sane people that conservatives do not give a f*** about real people and real lives. Also no one believes you truly care about babies, either.

Why can’t they? And they clearly have supportive friends and family, so they can’t find someone to watch their child? I’ve had to cart three children everywhere because my leftist husband wants to ride his bike all the time, and take ski vacations with friends. Ever have to cart three little kids and two dogs in two feet of snow to hotels due to a multi-day power outage? I have. Sucks but I did it.

We really need to compile your posts one day. I don’t know how you deal with your “leftist” husband. Such a cross to bear.

Can’t refute my points, so you resort to personal attacks. Got it.

Truth: money was raised for them by supportive friends to go out of state. They chose not to, due to whatever fears and reasons they had. She was second trimester and certainly could have done so. Now I’m getting “maybe she had a travel fear, etc”. The other poster brought up a good point about helping to alleviate the baby’s pain and got attacked. Seems like this thread is an agenda, and not true caring.

No personal attack, just an observation. You seem to hate your husband. I’m not sure that it’s political.

[Anonymous]

In addition, an abortion at her stage is two part. There would be women here who would be saying that it was torture for the mother to have to deliver. There’s, unfortunately, no ‘winning’ here

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

+1
It also puts the healthcare of women in the remaining free states at risk. There aren’t that many obstetricians to go around.

Anyone traveling to a state where abortion is still legal needs to show their voting record. If they voted GOP, nope, no taking services. You bought the ticket, you take the ride.

On the other hand, if this woman’s family starts voting for pro life candidates, that could be a lot of people changing sides. Milo’s parents, her parents, her 6 siblings, their spouses. That’s almost 20 people without getting into extended family, church, or friends. This is how change happens. Unfortunately because of republicans, a lot of babies are going to have to die, families will go into debt to pay for hospital bills that shouldn’t have been needed, some women will lose their fertility and lives along the way, and it’s going to break families apart with the stress of dying children, debt, and grief. But they will have won for a little while.

It may cause some people to change sides, but I doubt it. I have many prolifers in my own family who would stare down this kind of suffering, explain it away as God’s plan and good for them leaving open the possibility for a miracle, and then go right on back to the same crap way of voting. They don’t want to hear that they forced avoidable suffering on their loved ones. They don’t want to take accountability for they’ve done and what they supported.

They are all just “innocent Germans” who only cared about the economy.

Omg yes, this. I know all the same people, sadly.

Unfortunately. Abortion is also a violent procedure

A late term abortion involves injecting potassium
chloride into the heart to stop it That's it. That's violent vs watching the child gasp for air?

Sadly, palliative care for a newborn infant is still lacking in terms of knowledge among providers amd actual research for how best to apply it. It happens, but isn't so common to deal with a sudden infant death that is occurring within hours of birth. Research will improve given new laws that will require it more frequently, but undoubtedly, healthcare isn't as good as this as you might think for a newborn, let alone a newborn dying within 99 minutes requiring an IV and VERY quickly sorting out titrating up medication dosages.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5835990/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

"Take your kid with you" says the person who has never found themselves in such a situation. It's reactions like yours that confirm to us sane people that conservatives do not give a f*** about real people and real lives. Also no one believes you truly care about babies, either.

Why can’t they? And they clearly have supportive friends and family, so they can’t find someone to watch their child? I’ve had to cart three children everywhere because my leftist husband wants to ride his bike all the time, and take ski vacations with friends. Ever have to cart three little kids and two dogs in two feet of snow to hotels due to a multi-day power outage? I have. Sucks but I did it.

We really need to compile your posts one day. I don’t know how you deal with your “leftist” husband. Such a cross to bear.

Can’t refute my points, so you resort to personal attacks. Got it.

Truth: money was raised for them by supportive friends to go out of state. They chose not to, due to whatever fears and reasons they had. She was second trimester and certainly could have done so. Now I’m getting “maybe she had a travel fear, etc”. The other poster brought up a good point about helping to alleviate the baby’s pain and got attacked. Seems like this thread is an agenda, and not true caring.

No personal attack, just an observation. You seem to hate your husband. I’m not sure that it’s political.

Seem is your key word. I don’t hate anyone. I do think that he can put his political beliefs over practical beliefs, because the work doesn’t fall on him. That people who are ‘into’ climate change, for instance, often want to live a certain lifestyle but don’t have to take on the burden of that work. And often pick and choose how they live their values. You see this all the time - private jets justified at climate change conferences, for instance. Leftism can be as religious as devout Christianity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

+1
It also puts the healthcare of women in the remaining free states at risk. There aren’t that many obstetricians to go around.

Anyone traveling to a state where abortion is still legal needs to show their voting record. If they voted GOP, nope, no taking services. You bought the ticket, you take the ride.

On the other hand, if this woman’s family starts voting for pro life candidates, that could be a lot of people changing sides. Milo’s parents, her parents, her 6 siblings, their spouses. That’s almost 20 people without getting into extended family, church, or friends. This is how change happens. Unfortunately because of republicans, a lot of babies are going to have to die, families will go into debt to pay for hospital bills that shouldn’t have been needed, some women will lose their fertility and lives along the way, and it’s going to break families apart with the stress of dying children, debt, and grief. But they will have won for a little while.

It may cause some people to change sides, but I doubt it. I have many prolifers in my own family who would stare down this kind of suffering, explain it away as God’s plan and good for them leaving open the possibility for a miracle, and then go right on back to the same crap way of voting. They don’t want to hear that they forced avoidable suffering on their loved ones. They don’t want to take accountability for they’ve done and what they supported.

They are all just “innocent Germans” who only cared about the economy.

Omg yes, this. I know all the same people, sadly.

Unfortunately. Abortion is also a violent procedure

A late term abortion involves injecting potassium
chloride into the heart to stop it That's it. That's violent vs watching the child gasp for air?

Sadly, palliative care for a newborn infant is still lacking in terms of knowledge among providers amd actual research for how best to apply it. It happens, but isn't so common to deal with a sudden infant death that is occurring within hours of birth. Research will improve given new laws that will require it more frequently, but undoubtedly, healthcare isn't as good as this as you might think for a newborn, let alone a newborn dying within 99 minutes requiring an IV and VERY quickly sorting out titrating up medication dosages.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5835990/

Mother still has to deliver. Traumatic either way, no?