Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Hospital administrators do, yes
Which legislator do they call? How do they choose?
That’s for them to learn, if they haven’t already. If I’m a hospital administrator, this is something I have posted in my office
Legislatures pass laws, they don't clarify them. It would be up to the executive branch to decide whether or not to prosecute and the judicial branch to decide if such a prosecution was constitutional.
If the laws aren’t clear, do the abortion and let it litigate.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Any woke hospital can simply turn people away and blame the law to get media attention.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the posters blaming the FBI have a way for the federal government to ensure that local law enforcement believes rape reports and takes action— including even collecting the rape kits— i’m all ears.
But testing and taking action on rape kits— heck even 6 days after they’re collected— does nothing at all to protect girls from the consequences of the crime which has already taken place. A rape kit does not detect pregnancy.
So we’re back at the beginning. Why do you think these girls should have to give birth to their rapists babies?
Even the NYT writes articles using words like “almost” in their headlines because they know that rape is an exception.
What are you talking about? There is no rape exception in the Ohio law despite the governor asking for one.
And sadly rape is not an “exception”. There will be at least ten reported pregnancies in girls under 13 in Ohio this year. That doesn’t include the girls whose parents find a way to get them care. It is horrifically common.
In Ohio, she fell under this since the left agrees that 10 years old is too young and will cause bodily harm.
“Abortions beyond this threshold are legal if the provider determines it's a medical emergency and necessary to prevent the pregnant person's death or "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."”
Yet she had to leave the state to get an abortion. So your forced birth law is as crappy as everyone is trying to tell you it is while you keep arguing it’s decent. Such a moronic take on the world. Oh, well the law says this, kind of. I guess screw those girls and their lives and future fertility.
If that was the case, and they weren’t following the law, wouldn’t the Ohio state medical board be removing their medical licenses? Wouldn’t Ohio lawmakers be on every television saying they got the law all wrong and rushing to pass clarification?
And yet….
What? Makes no sense.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Any woke hospital can simply turn people away and blame the law to get media attention.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the posters blaming the FBI have a way for the federal government to ensure that local law enforcement believes rape reports and takes action— including even collecting the rape kits— i’m all ears.
But testing and taking action on rape kits— heck even 6 days after they’re collected— does nothing at all to protect girls from the consequences of the crime which has already taken place. A rape kit does not detect pregnancy.
So we’re back at the beginning. Why do you think these girls should have to give birth to their rapists babies?
Even the NYT writes articles using words like “almost” in their headlines because they know that rape is an exception.
What are you talking about? There is no rape exception in the Ohio law despite the governor asking for one.
And sadly rape is not an “exception”. There will be at least ten reported pregnancies in girls under 13 in Ohio this year. That doesn’t include the girls whose parents find a way to get them care. It is horrifically common.
In Ohio, she fell under this since the left agrees that 10 years old is too young and will cause bodily harm.
“Abortions beyond this threshold are legal if the provider determines it's a medical emergency and necessary to prevent the pregnant person's death or "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."”
Yet she had to leave the state to get an abortion. So your forced birth law is as crappy as everyone is trying to tell you it is while you keep arguing it’s decent. Such a moronic take on the world. Oh, well the law says this, kind of. I guess screw those girls and their lives and future fertility.
If that was the case, and they weren’t following the law, wouldn’t the Ohio state medical board be removing their medical licenses? Wouldn’t Ohio lawmakers be on every television saying they got the law all wrong and rushing to pass clarification?
And yet….
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Hospital administrators do, yes
Which legislator do they call? How do they choose?
That’s for them to learn, if they haven’t already. If I’m a hospital administrator, this is something I have posted in my office
Legislatures pass laws, they don't clarify them. It would be up to the executive branch to decide whether or not to prosecute and the judicial branch to decide if such a prosecution was constitutional.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
I think abortion can be very barbaric.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Ha - I remember actually asking that question in law school. This was in our pre-1L intro session, when we were at the SUPER basic level. The professor was explaining how courts have to interpret laws to determine the legislature's intent = and I asked, why can't you just get in touch the legislature and ask them, in addition to doing all this other stuff? I was told that's just not how it's done. But it does seem reasonable to think there might be some mechanism for determining legislative intent like that, even though there isn't.
So you got no answer from your professor, just a reply
DP and you give no answer to the question "which office or person in the legislature is responsible for answering questions from doctors and hospitals about laws that affect their work," just a reply.
Because that’s not my job. Your question should be directed to the hospital administration.
Aww. Did someone finally get it to sink in that the law is poorly written and patients, doctors and hospitals have no recourse. “Ask administration” is a dumb attempt to deflect that these laws are as stupid and barbaric as the people who wrote them.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Hospital administrators do, yes
Which legislator do they call? How do they choose?
That’s for them to learn, if they haven’t already. If I’m a hospital administrator, this is something I have posted in my office
Legislatures pass laws, they don't clarify them. It would be up to the executive branch to decide whether or not to prosecute and the judicial branch to decide if such a prosecution was constitutional.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Hospital administrators do, yes
Which legislator do they call? How do they choose?
That’s for them to learn, if they haven’t already. If I’m a hospital administrator, this is something I have posted in my office
Anonymous wrote:Any woke hospital can simply turn people away and blame the law to get media attention.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the posters blaming the FBI have a way for the federal government to ensure that local law enforcement believes rape reports and takes action— including even collecting the rape kits— i’m all ears.
But testing and taking action on rape kits— heck even 6 days after they’re collected— does nothing at all to protect girls from the consequences of the crime which has already taken place. A rape kit does not detect pregnancy.
So we’re back at the beginning. Why do you think these girls should have to give birth to their rapists babies?
Even the NYT writes articles using words like “almost” in their headlines because they know that rape is an exception.
What are you talking about? There is no rape exception in the Ohio law despite the governor asking for one.
And sadly rape is not an “exception”. There will be at least ten reported pregnancies in girls under 13 in Ohio this year. That doesn’t include the girls whose parents find a way to get them care. It is horrifically common.
In Ohio, she fell under this since the left agrees that 10 years old is too young and will cause bodily harm.
“Abortions beyond this threshold are legal if the provider determines it's a medical emergency and necessary to prevent the pregnant person's death or "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."”
Yet she had to leave the state to get an abortion. So your forced birth law is as crappy as everyone is trying to tell you it is while you keep arguing it’s decent. Such a moronic take on the world. Oh, well the law says this, kind of. I guess screw those girls and their lives and future fertility.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I’m glad all the outrage here is directed at the Supreme Court, rather than the rapist who raped a 10 year old.
Bravo!
We can multitask. The point is the government is traumatizing this child all over again. This is on you too.
Maybe start taking rape crimes seriously for a change.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Ha - I remember actually asking that question in law school. This was in our pre-1L intro session, when we were at the SUPER basic level. The professor was explaining how courts have to interpret laws to determine the legislature's intent = and I asked, why can't you just get in touch the legislature and ask them, in addition to doing all this other stuff? I was told that's just not how it's done. But it does seem reasonable to think there might be some mechanism for determining legislative intent like that, even though there isn't.
So you got no answer from your professor, just a reply
DP and you give no answer to the question "which office or person in the legislature is responsible for answering questions from doctors and hospitals about laws that affect their work," just a reply.
Because that’s not my job. Your question should be directed to the hospital administration.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Ha - I remember actually asking that question in law school. This was in our pre-1L intro session, when we were at the SUPER basic level. The professor was explaining how courts have to interpret laws to determine the legislature's intent = and I asked, why can't you just get in touch the legislature and ask them, in addition to doing all this other stuff? I was told that's just not how it's done. But it does seem reasonable to think there might be some mechanism for determining legislative intent like that, even though there isn't.
So you got no answer from your professor, just a reply
DP and you give no answer to the question "which office or person in the legislature is responsible for answering questions from doctors and hospitals about laws that affect their work," just a reply.
Because that’s not my job. Your question should be directed to the hospital administration.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the posters blaming the FBI have a way for the federal government to ensure that local law enforcement believes rape reports and takes action— including even collecting the rape kits— i’m all ears.
But testing and taking action on rape kits— heck even 6 days after they’re collected— does nothing at all to protect girls from the consequences of the crime which has already taken place. A rape kit does not detect pregnancy.
So we’re back at the beginning. Why do you think these girls should have to give birth to their rapists babies?
Even the NYT writes articles using words like “almost” in their headlines because they know that rape is an exception.
What are you talking about? There is no rape exception in the Ohio law despite the governor asking for one.
And sadly rape is not an “exception”. There will be at least ten reported pregnancies in girls under 13 in Ohio this year. That doesn’t include the girls whose parents find a way to get them care. It is horrifically common.
In Ohio, she fell under this since the left agrees that 10 years old is too young and will cause bodily harm.
“Abortions beyond this threshold are legal if the provider determines it's a medical emergency and necessary to prevent the pregnant person's death or "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."”
DP. This is too vague. At what point is a pregnancy considered life threatening? For example, in situations where there's premature rupture of membranes prior to the point of viability, yet still a heartbeat, where does the doctor draw the line? How close to septic does a woman need to be before this type of futile pregnancy is finally considered "life threatening"?
How about cases where fetal abnormalities affect the health or future fertility of the mother? Where's that "life threatening" threshold supposed to be set?
The laws were written specifically to be vague on this. It was absolutely intentional.
Also, it has to be an "emergency." A 10 year old can carry for a long time before it's an emergency. It's possible it would never become an emergency.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the hospital cared about 10 year old rape victims, they would have done the abortion and when charged (if, actually), put it to the media. The charges (if any) would be dropped
Do you have any idea what HIPAA is or how it works or how forced birther ghouls enforce the law? Any idea whatsoever?
I think you just like the idea of little girls in peril. I honestly think many of you delight in this mentally. Take it from there because I’m not writing out all the words but I think this excites a lot of you.
Instead of insulting me, why don’t you think about it. It’s my belief that hospitals are doing this to patients deliberately for the ‘cause’
What ‘cause’? Showing the legislature what the laws they passed prohibited? As interpreted by teams of lawyers employed by said hospitals?
From what I see of that law, there was no reason she would have been prevented from having an abortion in Ohio, given her age and risk to her life. The hospital refused, rather than clarify with legislature. The cause meaning turning away legitimate abortion cases to push the idea the state stopped it.
This is not a thing, and there is no mechanism by which to do so, but nice try.
What an abject idiot that PP is. Do they really think doctors call the legislature? Is there some hotline? This is so cringy.
Ha - I remember actually asking that question in law school. This was in our pre-1L intro session, when we were at the SUPER basic level. The professor was explaining how courts have to interpret laws to determine the legislature's intent = and I asked, why can't you just get in touch the legislature and ask them, in addition to doing all this other stuff? I was told that's just not how it's done. But it does seem reasonable to think there might be some mechanism for determining legislative intent like that, even though there isn't.
So you got no answer from your professor, just a reply
DP and you give no answer to the question "which office or person in the legislature is responsible for answering questions from doctors and hospitals about laws that affect their work," just a reply.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the posters blaming the FBI have a way for the federal government to ensure that local law enforcement believes rape reports and takes action— including even collecting the rape kits— i’m all ears.
But testing and taking action on rape kits— heck even 6 days after they’re collected— does nothing at all to protect girls from the consequences of the crime which has already taken place. A rape kit does not detect pregnancy.
So we’re back at the beginning. Why do you think these girls should have to give birth to their rapists babies?
Even the NYT writes articles using words like “almost” in their headlines because they know that rape is an exception.
What are you talking about? There is no rape exception in the Ohio law despite the governor asking for one.
And sadly rape is not an “exception”. There will be at least ten reported pregnancies in girls under 13 in Ohio this year. That doesn’t include the girls whose parents find a way to get them care. It is horrifically common.
In Ohio, she fell under this since the left agrees that 10 years old is too young and will cause bodily harm.
“Abortions beyond this threshold are legal if the provider determines it's a medical emergency and necessary to prevent the pregnant person's death or "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."”
DP. This is too vague. At what point is a pregnancy considered life threatening? For example, in situations where there's premature rupture of membranes prior to the point of viability, yet still a heartbeat, where does the doctor draw the line? How close to septic does a woman need to be before this type of futile pregnancy is finally considered "life threatening"?
How about cases where fetal abnormalities affect the health or future fertility of the mother? Where's that "life threatening" threshold supposed to be set?
The laws were written specifically to be vague on this. It was absolutely intentional.
Any woke hospital can simply turn people away and blame the law to get media attention.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If the posters blaming the FBI have a way for the federal government to ensure that local law enforcement believes rape reports and takes action— including even collecting the rape kits— i’m all ears.
But testing and taking action on rape kits— heck even 6 days after they’re collected— does nothing at all to protect girls from the consequences of the crime which has already taken place. A rape kit does not detect pregnancy.
So we’re back at the beginning. Why do you think these girls should have to give birth to their rapists babies?
Even the NYT writes articles using words like “almost” in their headlines because they know that rape is an exception.
What are you talking about? There is no rape exception in the Ohio law despite the governor asking for one.
And sadly rape is not an “exception”. There will be at least ten reported pregnancies in girls under 13 in Ohio this year. That doesn’t include the girls whose parents find a way to get them care. It is horrifically common.
In Ohio, she fell under this since the left agrees that 10 years old is too young and will cause bodily harm.
“Abortions beyond this threshold are legal if the provider determines it's a medical emergency and necessary to prevent the pregnant person's death or "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function."”
Yet she had to leave the state to get an abortion. So your forced birth law is as crappy as everyone is trying to tell you it is while you keep arguing it’s decent. Such a moronic take on the world. Oh, well the law says this, kind of. I guess screw those girls and their lives and future fertility.