Ashley Luna, I think we need to include protections for Healthcare workers who refuse to be participants of abortion procedures due to moral or religious beliefs. I’ve know nurses that were “let go” because they refused to assist in abortions. Your proposal is extremely well thought out and well written. As a Healthcare professional who worked in OB/GYN I know that regardless of laws abortions always have existed and will continue to exist. Pregnancy after rape is rare and abortions are much more dangerous than delivering a baby. Abortion laws were supposed to be for rare circumstances and now are used for basic birth control. I’ve seen, as I’m sure you have, women that have had 3 or 4 abortions for convenience, and then when they are ready to start a family wonder why they can’t get pregnant or keep having miscarriages from the damage done by abortions. Education is also key, so I agree with your proposal to involve highschool children with the information on not just birth control, but options for adoption. Adoption reform is also needed to make it more affordable, successful, and incorruptible. Anyone considering abortion definitely needs an ultrasound and must VIEW the fetus on ultrasound before making the decision. So many women think a 12 week fetus is a clump of cells rather than tiny human with all its miniature components. They also need FULL disclosure on what exactly will happen to the life inside them, the risk to their own bodies, and the risk to the ability to have future successful pregnancies. I’m writing this at near midnight after a long day, so I apologize for the lack of absolute elegance with which you created your proposal.
I think the best way to accomplish that would be for the hospital to draw up a list of situations in which a D&C or other means of feticide would be medically necessary/expected for them to participate in. This list should be provided ahead of time, prior to offering the job. If the worker does not want to placed in those situations, they should inform the employer ahead of time, they can make that accommodation. If the employer can’t accommodate that objection, then that worker should seek a different position.
Have you considered including a provision that guarantees that birth control is accessible and affordable?
My proposal primarily relates to managing pregnancy. A contraception-related stance can be proposed separately by someone more knowledgeable than me on that topic.
There are actually several reasons for abortion to save a woman’s life. I can list a few off the top of my head I have encountered.
- placental abruption
- Sepsis or other similar severe acute complications where doctor is usually forced to save one of the other
- Ectopic or molar pregnancies
- Preeclampsia
- Any chronic conditions that worsen and threaten mothers life (organ failure, cancer etc)
Preeclampsia, in those cases, the babies are delivered not aborted. In ectopic pregnancy, that is a a natural miscarriage. As far as the others, I can’t say that I have ever heard of mom’s aborting their children because of these conditions. I would guess in most cases, they would deliver the baby, not abort the baby. Most mothers in those circumstances are not going to say, kill my baby to save my life, as in the case of preeclampsia, which is a condition that does happen and ends in a baby being delivered. so the information is not truthful.
Dogmop is likely fully aware that there are medical circumstances requiring inducing delivery.
HOWEVER, many pro-lifers do NOT consider induced delivery as an “abortion” unless it’s being done with the purpose of killing the unborn child. Pro-lifers often go by the commonly understood definition of abortion, or they go by how their state legally defines it. For example, Texas specifically says that removal of an ectopic pregnancy, or removing a deceased embryo, is NOT legally an abortion.
In addition, after the baby is viable, then literally there is no medical reason to have a (fatal) abortion, because in those cases, the doctor can simply induce delivery without purposely trying to kill the child. (I still support exceptions for fatal/severe abnormalities because the child wouldn’t be viable.)
And then, we got Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry who claim the definition of abortion is merely the “termination of pregnancy.” A definition so broad it technically would include all live births.
See? There’s a disconnect.
Regardless of definitions, a federal exception law should go the extra mile and make it clear that those situations are covered and does NOT require the doctor to delay care.
I suspect that even though pro-lifers really like my ideas, some don’t like that I’m using the word “abortion” for medical emergency situations in which they’d prefer a different term for. I was just trying to use language that people understand what I mean though.
This in all honesty looks really damn good
I believe in providing comprehensive education for women and girls about contraceptives and responsible practices to avoid unwanted pregnancies. This could be added to sex education in school. It should be mandatory that they learn what an abortion is and just how horrible it is for that baby. I believe that young girls would be a lot more careful about getting pregnant if there was mandatory education on abortion practices. Birth control should be cheap to free for people that can’t afford it and the Plan B pill should be advocated especially for those who have been raped. Focusing on not getting pregnant in the first place should be a priority. No one should be forced to have a child if they don’t want one but it’s tricky because no one should have the right to kill another human being. especially a defenseless unborn baby.
I just read your abortion suggestions. Regarding this topic, my opinion is that adoption must be the primary issue pushed for any/all that believe abortion is murder. Adoption deserves as much and so much more attention. New systems, processes and procedures must be established, mindsets must be changed so that adoption is the first choice. We as a nation can not continue the wholesale slaughter of these kids.
Secondly, provisions should be included that end any profit from the dead bodies of these babies, they should be few in number and they should be buried or cremated, not dishonored .
Many people say the same thing (about promoting adoption, as well as to encourage mothers of disabled babies to choose life), but may not be aware that we need bold initiatives to support that goal.
My comprehensive proposal includes various direct, and indirect, ways encourage mothers in the toughest situations to choose life and/or adoption can be promoted, for example:
- Require medical providers to inform their maternal patients, and for high schools and colleges to inform their students, and for Medicaid and insurance companies to inform their recipients, about their maternal health care rights outlined in these proposed laws, and their adoption options.
- Informed consent for every elective abortion requires, among other things… an explicit description of …her available options/resources, and (if applicable) a warning about false positives for fetal abnormalities.
Alleviate fear and apprehension of choosing life for mothers of disabled babies
- Fund healthcare services, surgeries and treatments necessary for patients with Trisomy 18, and track/study their progress/health outcomes, in order to uncover their survivability when receiving full medical interventions that are often denied to them, and improve standards of care.
Fund the adoption legal fees for pre-screened families for babies with major disabilities. Give birthmothers a federal right to choose adoption for newborns & visitation rights in adoption agreements.
-
Commit to policies and regulations to help protect disabled and seniors from abuse and neglect. Fund and authorize increases in caregiver and nursing staff to patient/resident ratios in group homes, nursing homes and long term care facilities. Assign a social worker to check in with disabled and senior patients/residents and ensure they are connected with their best available options and resources. Allow Medi-Care to fund in-home caregiving in cases in which the patient qualified for nursing or long-term care.
-
Require high schools to offer an awareness class, taught by a non-ideological, independently contracted source, regarding: … adoption;*
I appreciate how weak thought out this is. The only thing stopping me from voting for this is the clause about fines for refusing care. For religious reasons, providers can have an issue providing certain care (similar to the bakery baking Gay wedding cake situation). Other than that, this is a good start.
If they are refusing to do an elective abortion, that’s one thing. This bill just reinforces medical professionals’ existing obligation to not delay any medically necessary “abortion” in which a delay would endanger her life/physical health.
I think the best way to work around this would be for the hospital to draw up a list of situations in which a D&C or other means of feticide would be medically necessary/expected for them to participate in. This list should be provided ahead of time, prior to offering the job. If the worker does not want to placed in those situations, they should inform the employer ahead of time, they can make that accommodation. If the employer can’t accommodate that objection, then that worker should seek a different position.
I also want to echo appreciation for the amount of thought and work you’ve put into this policy. I understand the Trump family’s stance on the issue and that we can expect to see nothing more than limits in his administration, presuming he is elected.
Some things I disagree with:
- Medical professionals should not be forced against their will to provide care that they do not agree with
- I don’t think the government should be involved in funding lawsuits (I am personally against government-provided medical funding in general). Leave this to private institutions & generosity of the public.
- A state should be allowed to institute its own laws that go beyond the federal limits
- A mother who purposefully and knowingly ends the life of her baby in a state that does not allow this should be held liable for her actions
But primarily, my stance on this generally boils down to:
- Life begins at conception
- It is unjust to take life, except under a single circumstance: when that life endangers another’s
We can talk about all of the exceptions we want, but my standpoint (from a strictly pragmatic perspective) is that it is unnecessary to take the life of a baby/fetus/fertilized egg unless that pregnancy endangers the life of the mother. And even in that case, all attempts and care should still be taken to try to preserve the life of both. Yes, even in the most grotesque circumstances of a pregnancy or if the baby is disfigured or disabled, the life of the baby still stands. Because even in those situations, it is not necessary for the mother to keep the child, only to allow the baby to live now that its life has only just begun.
I can’t completely agree since I believe we need to go much further, but with that said, I would say that, overall, the limits that your policy provides have my support for taking steps to protect life
Thank you, however:
- This bill does NOT force medical professionals to provide elective abortion services. It only strengthens existing standards of care and regulations which require medical professionals to provide life-saving care, up to an “abortion” in times in which her life is threatened. It also helps prevent Democrats from exploiting false headlines to steal more support for elective abortion.
- The government is quite involved in suing and penalizing people for violating the law and hurting people. That includes medical neglect and abuse. That Georgia hospital got Amber Thurman killed because they wouldn’t provide a legal D & C that she needed to treat her abortion pill complications.
- I specifically stated that this bill does not ban abortion, nor does it interfere with states’ gestational limits.
- There’s a lot of shoulds in this world. I think men who exploit women’s bodies and impregnate women against their will should also be penalized. OTOH, it’s not always effective to prosecute everything that we know is wrong. Full abortion bans are not in play, and even if Trump did pass one, it would cause a Blue Wave and the next president would immediately replace it with abortion-until-birth.
- I’m not arguing with you over whether killing unborn children is wrong or not. I am a pro-life woman. However, currently one million babies are heading for the slaughterhouse every year, 70,000 of which are fully developed and feel pain, and 10,000 of which are viable and high risk of being born alive and subsequently killed again by MEDICAL NEGLECT. If we do not support legislation like this, Democrats will pass abortion-until-birth in every state and your words won’t save them.
This is HORRIBLE! IT is not a pro-life suggestion WHATSOEVER.
Since when does a baby conceived in ra pe deserve the deat h penalty for her father’s crime?
Since when should we devalue the life of a person with a disability to the point we can ki ll him or her before birth to alleviate our burden?
Since when is abortion safer than life birth past the first trimester?
Since when is an operation for a tubal pregnancy an abortion?
Abortion is mur der! It should be prohibited in the HOMI CIDE STATUTES.
Moreover, you advocate pointing the government’s gun at me and my neighbor to take our money to fund all sorts of programs for pregnant mothers so they can use the threat of abortion to get what they want.
What makes you think any sane person who knows babies are human beings would support this?
There is no such thing as a right to rob your neighbor so you can receive healthcare or to let someone else do it on your behalf. Let people who want, voluntarily give their money and services. Most of us do anyway. Charity needs to be privatized. The Constitution does not authorize robbing peter to pay paul, and the government is in no position to offer true help and screen out the frau dulent claims. God never gave that responsibility to government. He gave it to the church and the family. And who do you think you are to demand that people be TAXED to pay for an abortion on a disabled baby or a baby who was conceived in ra pe?
Above all, it is NEVER pro-life to allow for ANY ki lling of a baby who can be saved, for any reason whatsoever. It is simply false to claim otherwise. It certainly isn’t common sense. Please think it over.
Sorry, but abortion IS infantic ide, just earlier in life.
A woman’s bodily autonomy doesn’t extend to harming someone else’s body. When a baby can be successfully transplanted into another woman’s womb, that is what abortion amounts to.
A ra pe exception is a hole big enough to drive a Mack truck through. I spoke to a woman in Cleveland during International Women’s Year. She worked in an abortion facility that offered free abortions to ra pe victims. They had so many women claiming they had been ra ped they had to start requiring a police report. Now keep in mind that if there is a police report, she can receive immediate medical care to prevent pregnancy and treat for any possible VD that the perp might have had.
Since when does being conceived in ra pe a capital offense? Why are we punishing the baby for the father’s crime?
Since abortion activists use rape to justify abortion-until-birth, and rape only accounts for 0.05% of abortion, this bill attempts to stop punishing the 99.5% of viable babies that we CAN save, for the 0.05% that we CANNOT save yet, at least not in this round. It also includes safe-guards to prevent the abuse of rape exceptions, that can be further worked on by legislators.
And fortunately, in our country, there is no law that can’t be changed later by legislators again. If the data shows that there is a higher than expected numbers of rape exceptions being used, then states should be able to impose additional measures.
WE ARE ALL INCOMPATIBLE WITH LIFE. It just catches up with some people sooner than others. Why not let the baby be born, living or not, and let the parents have even those few precious moments with him or her, and a conscience free of guilt of having cut that short life even shorter?
I guess you haven’t talked to ra pe victims. 72% of them carry to term, in spite of heavy pressure from society to abort. Women who have abortions often say the abortion was like a second ra pe and far worse than the first. Keep in mind that it is a much deeper invasion of her body, and that she has bonded with the baby during the first couple of days after conception, even though she is not consciously aware, and this will have consequences. In fact, the baby sends stem cells to the mother through the placenta. Some lodge in the brain. A baby being aborted releases many more. Pain causes certain chemicals, which are likely to be in those stem cells. The mother will have those in her brain for the rest of her life. She won’t necessarily be consciously aware of it, but it will take its toll. You are doing no kindness to any woman by thinking that abortion will help her if she is the victim of assault.
I know or knew three women who conceived after assault. Two had their babies and raised them themselves, and did splendidly. The other had an abortion. She was in and out of mental hospitals and it wrecked her first marriage (to my son). She also miscarried four babies afterwards. She had two more failed marriages (I don’t know the story) and is now happily married to a fine Christian man who cherishes her, and has had five more children. But what she went through to get there shouldn’t be forced onto any woman, let alone the victim of assault.
Unborn babies react to threats and pain at 6 weeks. How do you plan to administer anesthesia to them? Next?