Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If bad doctors were not illegally selling fully formed fetuses by the body parts on the black market , courts would be more open to the doctors opinion .
^^Regardless of the Nebraska law, this case should not have fallen under its jurisdiction. This was a medical situation.
There are many laws at the state level that regulate medical procedures and not just abortion either. In all states, state laws regulate medical practice. Not trying to be snarky to you but I'll go back to pointing out that "what should be" and "what IS" are, as often as not, two different things.
Veering off a little.........governments from the local level to the very top meddle too much in private affairs and said governments are composed of human beings elected by other human beings who want things to be a certain way. There is no perfect solution to many of the social problems that beset us and, in all likelihood, as a country we will continue to argue ad infinitum about a variety of things. And then when society evolves to a point where today's issues are no longer issues, something else will arise to take its place.
There wasn't a shred of "journalism" in that story. That's a blog written by someone that supports abortion. The FACTS are that a woman lost her child when she went into premature labor. Period. This "article" explains nothing more than that. The rest is just rhetoric and nothing more. I'm pretty sure that the doctors made decisions to try to save both the child and the mother, and didn't get into a political discussion in the hospital.
But then one fool tries to glam it up with the "crushing a baby" headline and the rest of the fools fall lockstep in line, as usual.
Besides, the pro-abortion crowd doesn't even consider it a baby, so why the big deal? They're just clumps of cells, right? Or is it a baby when it works for your argument, and all other times it's just a parasite latching on to the mother? Make up your mind.
If bad doctors were not illegally selling fully formed fetuses by the body parts on the black market , courts would be more open to the doctors opinion .
I'm sure you've got some links to confirm this assertion.
There wasn't a shred of "journalism" in that story. That's a blog written by someone that supports abortion. The FACTS are that a woman lost her child when she went into premature labor. Period. This "article" explains nothing more than that. The rest is just rhetoric and nothing more. I'm pretty sure that the doctors made decisions to try to save both the child and the mother, and didn't get into a political discussion in the hospital.
But then one fool tries to glam it up with the "crushing a baby" headline and the rest of the fools fall lockstep in line, as usual.
Besides, the pro-abortion crowd doesn't even consider it a baby, so why the big deal? They're just clumps of cells, right? Or is it a baby when it works for your argument, and all other times it's just a parasite latching on to the mother? Make up your mind.
There are many laws at the state level that regulate medical procedures and not just abortion either. In all states, state laws regulate medical practice. Not trying to be snarky to you but I'll go back to pointing out that "what should be" and "what IS" are, as often as not, two different things.
Veering off a little.........governments from the local level to the very top meddle too much in private affairs and said governments are composed of human beings elected by other human beings who want things to be a certain way. There is no perfect solution to many of the social problems that beset us and, in all likelihood, as a country we will continue to argue ad infinitum about a variety of things. And then when society evolves to a point where today's issues are no longer issues, something else will arise to take its place.
Well, no s***! But this was not a woman demanding an abortion. This was a case of premature labor, that should have been handled medically. This case should not have fallen under the abortion law at all.
There wasn't a shred of "journalism" in that story. That's a blog written by someone that supports abortion. The FACTS are that a woman lost her child when she went into premature labor. Period. This "article" explains nothing more than that. The rest is just rhetoric and nothing more. I'm pretty sure that the doctors made decisions to try to save both the child and the mother, and didn't get into a political discussion in the hospital.
But then one fool tries to glam it up with the "crushing a baby" headline and the rest of the fools fall lockstep in line, as usual.
Besides, the pro-abortion crowd doesn't even consider it a baby, so why the big deal? They're just clumps of cells, right? Or is it a baby when it works for your argument, and all other times it's just a parasite latching on to the mother? Make up your mind.
Links to news reports on the situation have also already been provided in this thread. Those links basically confirm what was written in the blog entry but with more details.
"What we learned from the perinatologist was that because there was no cushion, she couldn't move her arms and legs because of contractures," said Deaver, a 34-year-old nurse from Grand Isle, Neb. "And her face and head would be deformed because the uterus pushed down so hard."
...
In her case, Danielle Deaver insisted, "We didn't want an abortion."
... "What we wanted," she said, "was our labor induced so that I would go into labor and give birth to her and the outcome of her life would not have been different." "My health was at risk, as well," she added. "We decided going forward it [premature labor] would be inevitable and we wanted nature to take its course. We were told we couldn't do that."
... Danielle and Robb Deaver argue that their daughter, who gasped for breath and died in her arms 10 days following the initial complications after a natural birth, likely was in great pain in utero as she waited her inevitable death. ... The baby likely would be born with contractures -- shortening of the muscle tissue. Because its skull still was soft, the uterine muscle would cause deformities. The couple desperately hoped for a miracle, talking to doctors about bed rest, fluid replacement or use of steroids to save the pregnancy.
... "The risk of the baby developing an infection and the placenta coming out were real," said Pankrazt. "The mom was also at risk for an infection." He said that a year ago, granting Danielle Deaver's wishes would "not have been an issue," and he could have induced labor for a vaginal birth. "This is not at all a partial birth abortion," said Pankrazt. "She could deliver and hold the baby and do all those things.
There wasn't a shred of "journalism" in that story. That's a blog written by someone that supports abortion. The FACTS are that a woman lost her child when she went into premature labor. Period. This "article" explains nothing more than that. The rest is just rhetoric and nothing more. I'm pretty sure that the doctors made decisions to try to save both the child and the mother, and didn't get into a political discussion in the hospital.
But then one fool tries to glam it up with the "crushing a baby" headline and the rest of the fools fall lockstep in line, as usual.
Besides, the pro-abortion crowd doesn't even consider it a baby, so why the big deal? They're just clumps of cells, right? Or is it a baby when it works for your argument, and all other times it's just a parasite latching on to the mother? Make up your mind.
Did you bother to read anything else in the thread? There was an ABC article - NEWS article - posted which not only confirmed the blog, but included much more detail. If the losing of her amniotic fluid had happened 3 weeks earlier, she would have had labor induced, the baby would have been born and died without ever becoming any kind of issue. But, because she was 22 weeks instead of 19, the doctors were not legally allowed to induce labor because of this stupid law.
[quote=kevcrawford;18357191]There wasn't a shred of "journalism" in that story. That's a blog written by someone that supports abortion. The FACTS are that a woman lost her child when she went into premature labor. Period. This "article" explains nothing more than that. The rest is just rhetoric and nothing more. I'm pretty sure that the doctors made decisions to try to save both the child and the mother, and didn't get into a political discussion in the hospital.
But then one fool tries to glam it up with the "crushing a baby" headline and the rest of the fools fall lockstep in line, as usual.
Besides, the pro-abortion crowd doesn't even consider it a baby, so why the big deal? They're just clumps of cells, right? Or is it a baby when it works for your argument, and all other times it's just a parasite latching on to the mother? Make up your mind.[/quote
Obviously you didn't bother to read beyond the OP, if you had you would have seen the actual news report that someone else posted. I know sometimes it is easier just to respond to the OP but then you can miss other pertinent facts that may come up in the other posts.
Well, no s***! But this was not a woman demanding an abortion. This was a case of premature labor, that should have been handled medically. This case should not have fallen under the abortion law at all.
For once I agree with you......which will probably never happen again. But the reality is that it DID fall under Nebraska's shortsighted abortion law. That's why I said Nebraska legislators need to get back to the drawing board and correct this before some other parents have to go through what this couple did.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But the reality is that it DID fall under Nebraska's shortsighted abortion law. That's why I said Nebraska legislators need to get back to the drawing board and correct this before some other parents have to go through what this couple did.
