Reply to Doctors, hospitals and abortions

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Doctors, hospitals and abortions"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is the first of what are likely many similar cases that will end up coming to light.
Investigation into maternal deaths takes time.  Some states (i.e., TX) now have a vested interest in not actively pursuing investigations and studies in maternal mortality rates.  And some families will be hesitant to come forward publicly about their losses.
Already, there are multiple stories of women who have suffered permanent loss of fertility due to lack of appropriate medical care.  At least one or 2 of the women involved in the lawsuit down in TX ended up needing hysterectomies due to hemorrhage and/or sepsis.[/quote]
This is what is so confusing and infuriating in these cases. Why exactly is the care being delayed? Is it because the fetus still has a heartbeat? Sepsis and hemorrhage are both medical emergencies and time is of the essence. The mother's life is potentially on the line so why would a doctor not take immediate action? Even if the fetus has a heartbeat it won't have one for much longer is no care is provided resulting in the mother's death. [/quote]

NO. IT IS BECAUSE DOCTORS CAN BE HELD LIABLE FOR ASSISTING JN AN ABORTION.

MISCARRIAGES SOMETIMES LOOK LIKE AN UNSUCCESSFUL ABORTION.

SOMETIMES DOCTORS ARE PRESENTED WITH AN UNSUCCESSFUL ABORTION.

MANY MANY OTHER THINGS CAN GO WRONG IN PREGNANCY AND IT IS NOT ALWAYS CLEAR IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION WHAT THE CAUSE IS.

DO YOU REALLY NOT UNDERSTAND THIS?!?[/quote]

Different poster, but [b]what I don't understand about this specific case is they KNEW they needed to intervene, and delayed.[/b] It was clear cut intervention, and fast intervention, was needed, or she would die. They decided to not intervene until later, and she died. Meanwhile GOP could still prosecute because they did intervene. [/quote]

That's what exception for "life of the mother" means in practice - it means the doctors have to intentionally wait and wait and wait until the woman is septic, coding, organs damaged and failing, basically about to die. Everyone knows what intervention and care is needed but you literally don't do it and take a gamble on when the last possible moment is.

It's the opposite of normal medical care.[/quote]
+1 That’s the difference between a state that has a ban with exceptions for the life or the health of the mother, vs. a state with a ban with exceptions for only the life of the mother. The decisions involved get really grisly, which is why you have women sent out of hospitals to get much worse at home, at work, or in parking lots before they can get care. For more if you can stomach it, read up on the oral arguments in the Idaho vs. U.S. EMTALA Supreme Court case.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics