Scott Walker on mandatory ultrasounds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why because in any other major surgery you don't like to see X-rays, ct scans, etc. of your body to make an informed choice?

No one forces you by law to look at your x-rays or scans. And neither x-rays or scans cause pain. Vaginal ultrasounds are very painful.

Really? I have had many due to polycystic ovaries and I can assure you they are completely painless. You don't need to penetrate the cervix in any way. Where the f*ck do you get your information? Abortions, on the other hand, are painful.

Really. Where the f*ck do you get YOUR information? I don't even know what 'you don't need to penetrate the cervix' even means. So it's fine with you having a probe shoved up your body as long as they don't 'penetrate the cervix'. Good to know. And BTW, If you have vaginismus, I can assure you that ANY penetration is extremely painful. I have to assume that you have first hand experience with the pain of abortion, or you would not make the assertion that it is painful. Right...RIGHT?

The mandatory violation of a woman who is seeking a legal medical procedure is effectively rape. It is absolutely outrageous that these sorts of procedures - mostly put forth by men - are allowed.

When opinions like these are thrown around as facts it makes me so worried for our society.

STFU you sanctimonious fool.

What an intelligent arguement. It really makes me value your opinion and want to hear more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why because in any other major surgery you don't like to see X-rays, ct scans, etc. of your body to make an informed choice?

No one forces you by law to look at your x-rays or scans. And neither x-rays or scans cause pain. Vaginal ultrasounds are very painful.

No. They are not. I have had at least 50, if not more. Most women who go through IVF do. They are not the least bit painful. As a matter of fact, it is more painful/uncomfortable to have a papsmear.

FWIW - I am pro-choice and don't understand why EITHER side of the fence is making this into a debate. Transvaginal ultrasounds are helpful for dating the embryo. I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that there are different methods based on how far along you are. That being said, it is my uterus/embryo - let me make the best choice for MYSELF medically with assistance from my doctor - without dictating to me based on YOUR political agenda.

Because once the govt begins to dictate that you have to have certain gynecological/obstetric procedures, inserting themselves into the doctor/patient relationship, specifically targeted at women's reproduction, where does the long arm of the vaginal wand stop?

So let's not require it. Let's let a vaginal ultrasound - or any ultrasound is strictly a woman's choice. Are you willing to require a woman to sign a legal document stating the facility and doctor have no legal liability if something goes wrong? After all, you can be wrong about the date, the structure of your uterus, or whether or not you have a tubal pregnancy.

You are assuming 1. that the ultrasounds are for women's health and 2. that abortions without ultrasounds have been so routinely bothered that this law was just necessary. Where is the evidence that this law is medically unnecessary and that politicians know better than doctors?

That's because legitimate clinics do the ultrasounds. Those that don't are the issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why because in any other major surgery you don't like to see X-rays, ct scans, etc. of your body to make an informed choice?

No one forces you by law to look at your x-rays or scans. And neither x-rays or scans cause pain. Vaginal ultrasounds are very painful.

No. They are not. I have had at least 50, if not more. Most women who go through IVF do. They are not the least bit painful. As a matter of fact, it is more painful/uncomfortable to have a papsmear.

FWIW - I am pro-choice and don't understand why EITHER side of the fence is making this into a debate. Transvaginal ultrasounds are helpful for dating the embryo. I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that there are different methods based on how far along you are. That being said, it is my uterus/embryo - let me make the best choice for MYSELF medically with assistance from my doctor - without dictating to me based on YOUR political agenda.

Because once the govt begins to dictate that you have to have certain gynecological/obstetric procedures, inserting themselves into the doctor/patient relationship, specifically targeted at women's reproduction, where does the long arm of the vaginal wand stop?

So let's not require it. Let's let a vaginal ultrasound - or any ultrasound is strictly a woman's choice. Are you willing to require a woman to sign a legal document stating the facility and doctor have no legal liability if something goes wrong? After all, you can be wrong about the date, the structure of your uterus, or whether or not you have a tubal pregnancy.

You are assuming 1. that the ultrasounds are for women's health and 2. that abortions without ultrasounds have been so routinely bothered that this law was just necessary. Where is the evidence that this law is medically unnecessary and that politicians know better than doctors?

That's because legitimate clinics do the ultrasounds. Those that don't are the issue

That's not true. No one seems to feel an ultrasound is necessary in cases where the heartbeat is lost. Therefore this is not about the health of the mother.

[Anonymous]

Often you can date a pregnancy pretty well by HCG levels. No need for an ultrasound at all.

And no, vaginal ultrasound wands are not the size of a tampon, and it can be painful. Do a Google image search for "vaginal ultrasound wand" if you don't believe me. I've had approximately 10,000 of them (maybe a slight exaggeration) due to fertility issues and yes, some were painful. All were unpleasant, and would have been triply so if they'd been against my will and performed for political, not medical reasons.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:If you want conservatives to oppose ultrasounds, just get Obamacare to pay for them. At that point, ultrasounds will be violating conservatives' religious freedom.

I love you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:If you want conservatives to oppose ultrasounds, just get Obamacare to pay for them. At that point, ultrasounds will be violating conservatives' religious freedom.

I love you.

Actually, conservatives would oppose Obamacare paying for abortions. Ultrasounds covered by Obamacare for other reasons is something I, (a conservative) support, because ultrasounds provide a wealth of information that allow doctors to make streamlined, accurate decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Often you can date a pregnancy pretty well by HCG levels. No need for an ultrasound at all.

And no, vaginal ultrasound wands are not the size of a tampon, and it can be painful. Do a Google image search for "vaginal ultrasound wand" if you don't believe me. I've had approximately 10,000 of them (maybe a slight exaggeration) due to fertility issues and yes, some were painful. All were unpleasant, and would have been triply so if they'd been against my will and performed for political, not medical reasons.

You really can't. An HCG level won't tell you if the embryo is in the tube. It won't tell you squat about the anatomy of the uterus. Those are medical issues, not political. Want to forgo the ultrasound? I would make it mandatory for the woman to sign a contract that states she will not sue if she is damaged due to the abortion if she refuses an ultrasound. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why because in any other major surgery you don't like to see X-rays, ct scans, etc. of your body to make an informed choice?

No one forces you by law to look at your x-rays or scans. And neither x-rays or scans cause pain. Vaginal ultrasounds are very painful.

No. They are not. I have had at least 50, if not more. Most women who go through IVF do. They are not the least bit painful. As a matter of fact, it is more painful/uncomfortable to have a papsmear.

FWIW - I am pro-choice and don't understand why EITHER side of the fence is making this into a debate. Transvaginal ultrasounds are helpful for dating the embryo. I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that there are different methods based on how far along you are. That being said, it is my uterus/embryo - let me make the best choice for MYSELF medically with assistance from my doctor - without dictating to me based on YOUR political agenda.

Because once the govt begins to dictate that you have to have certain gynecological/obstetric procedures, inserting themselves into the doctor/patient relationship, specifically targeted at women's reproduction, where does the long arm of the vaginal wand stop?

So let's not require it. Let's let a vaginal ultrasound - or any ultrasound is strictly a woman's choice. Are you willing to require a woman to sign a legal document stating the facility and doctor have no legal liability if something goes wrong? After all, you can be wrong about the date, the structure of your uterus, or whether or not you have a tubal pregnancy.

You are assuming 1. that the ultrasounds are for women's health and 2. that abortions without ultrasounds have been so routinely bothered that this law was just necessary. Where is the evidence that this law is medically unnecessary and that politicians know better than doctors?

That's because legitimate clinics do the ultrasounds. Those that don't are the issue

That's not true. No one seems to feel an ultrasound is necessary in cases where the heartbeat is lost. Therefore this is not about the health of the mother.

Are you kidding me? Doppler is a form of ultrasound, but you know that, correct?

And yes, if they detect no heartbeat, they do an ultrasound. Why? Because in early pregnancy, dopplers might miss the heartbeat as they are not as sensitive as trans-vaginal ultrasounds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vaginal wanding didn't hurt me a bit.
I agree that doctors should follow safe practices before conducting an abortion. If my doctor thinks a vaginal wanding is in order, fine.

The govt ordering that I have to submit to a vaginal wanding under any circumstances whatsoever is completely unacceptable. Being penetrated by any object against your will IS rape, as a PP suggested.

I'm the OP and I later found this quote from Walker:

"We just knew if we signed that law, if we provided the information that more people if they saw that unborn child would make a decision to protect and keep the life of that unborn child."

So the purpose of the law is clear. Guilt, not healthcare.

Why feel guilty ? It's not a human life. It's a parasite. A bundle of cells. Right?

You misunderstood PP's post. Walker's motivation is clearly not healthcare but to guilt the woman.

Again, if it's just a bundle of cells and not a viable human life, seeing the ultrasound would not make one feel guilty. I understand perfectly. Walker can't make a woman feel anything.

+1

[Anonymous]

The point is to stop women from having abortions by making it as expensive and uncomfortable as possible - this has nothing to do with the health of the woman. And Walker freely admitted that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point is to stop women from having abortions by making it as expensive and uncomfortable as possible - this has nothing to do with the health of the woman. And Walker freely admitted that.

You are simply making this up.

Ultrasounds should not add additional cost to an abortion at a good clinic. Because they are already doing them. If you want a Gosnell-style clinic, then sure, but I don't think you are advocating for more butchery, are you?

Again, if all you are doing is sweeping out a bundle of cells, a parasite, a non-viable 'thing' in your body that you don't want, having an ultrasound to be sure you are not damaged by the medical procedure you are about to have, should not be an issue. I would assume that you would want state-of-the-art care. That's what an ultrasound provides. This is not about health to you - what it's about is denial.