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.
Read the links I posted. There doesn't have to be a central repository. Electronic records can be aggregated anywhere... a 'cloud' for easier access by health care professionals, services that have multiple e-records clients, etc. Many times, that info is hacked and sold.
There isn't one "cloud" where all of your data is stored, it doesn't seem that you even understand the concept of cloud storage. And information being hacked and sold has NOTHING to do with your claim that every bit of your medical history can be obtained from one source.
The glee is from seeing women provided with the information they need to make a responsible and properly informed decision about this critically important choice.
You appear to to be disturbed to see them empowered in this way.
So how exactly is having a vaginal ultrasound and then having the sonogram detailed by the doctor while you listen to the heartbeat being provided with the information you need?
The purpose of an early vaginal ultrasound is to pin point gestation, check for a fetal heartbeat, ectopic pregnancy and rule out risks of early labor. This is not always done even for wanted pregnancies and the doctor is not normally the one that does them its the sonographer.
Believe it or not women are informed about what pregnancy is and what abortion is. Anyone can google and find descriptions, sonograms, developmental stages, and any information pregnancy, birth and abortion.
Forcing women to undergo this is totally unnecessary. It is not even standard procedure for informational purposes for women who are going through with their pregnancy.
That this is not just some blob of goo, it is a person inside her. If she realizes that five years after the abortion, it is a bit late.
There are lots of procedures that require invasive testing and full information before they can be performed. A state probably can legitimately decide it is better for a woman's long term mental heath is she is fully aware of the condition of the person inside of her before she decides to kill them.
That is not all that different than other requirements before certain procedures are undertaken. Showing her the baby via ultrasound makes more sense. It will help with the decision in either direction. Forcing her to listen the heartbeat - it seem more like punishment than information.
Its a developing fetus or embryo.
So what other medical procedures do you believe the state is better qualified to determine the patients long term mental health and level of understanding of the procedure and what constitutes informed decisions. vasectomy, tubal ligation, pregnancy/birth? If you wait 5 years its too late. You can never have children or you have children you are not mentally prepared to raise. What about couples who continue to try to conceive and have a child knowing they have thyroid, immunological disorders or are prone to carry chromosomal abnormalities. How about cosmetic surgery, breast augmentations, face lifts, tattoos, genital piercings?
You said other procedures require additional state mandated procedures before the actual procedure can be done, what are they?
Read the links I posted. There doesn't have to be a central repository. Electronic records can be aggregated anywhere... a 'cloud' for easier access by health care professionals, services that have multiple e-records clients, etc. Many times, that info is hacked and sold.
You claimed that "all of your records are accessible" inferring that they are up there in "the cloud" now you are backtracking and talking about hacking.
At some point they are a person. Are they less a person while in the birth canal 3 second before birth than they are three seconds after birth? What about an hour before? A week? If they miss the scheduled delivery date and labor has to be induced can they be killed at that time?
Where is the line? We simply do not know. The science version keeps moving earlier and earlier.
Absolutely the mother should have all available information about where her baby is on that line before she decides whether or not to have someone kill the baby.
This is no different than requiring a patient be informed of the the risks and the possibility of failure of a cancer operation (or any operation). Especially in late term pregnancies, the mother should be informed of the possibility of the baby being born alive and left to die on the operating table. She should also be informed if her baby is independently viable (i.e. they can live outside the womb). If we know whether the baby has feeling at their stage of development the other must be so informed. If we do not know one way or the other, she should also be so informed. Showing her what the baby looks like and what functionality they have is simply part of providing information necessary to make an informed decision. She should also be notified of potential mental side effects,especially with the possibility that science develops more or better information, or she changes her mind about her current beliefs. What is really cruel is not telling the mother these things and leaving her to find out after the fact. In fact that is one of the most horrid things I can think of that people can do to someone.
At some point they are a person. Are they less a person while in the birth canal 3 second before birth than they are three seconds after birth? What about an hour before? A week? If they miss the scheduled delivery date and labor has to be induced can they be killed at that time?
Where is the line? We simply do not know. The science version keeps moving earlier and earlier.
Absolutely the mother should have all available information about where her baby is on that line before she decides whether or not to have someone kill the baby.
This is no different than requiring a patient be informed of the the risks and the possibility of failure of a cancer operation (or any operation). Especially in late term pregnancies, the mother should be informed of the possibility of the baby being born alive and left to die on the operating table. She should also be informed if her baby is independently viable (i.e. they can live outside the womb). If we know whether the baby has feeling at their stage of development the other must be so informed. If we do not know one way or the other, she should also be so informed. Showing her what the baby looks like and what functionality they have is simply part of providing information necessary to make an informed decision. She should also be notified of potential mental side effects,especially with the possibility that science develops more or better information, or she changes her mind about her current beliefs. What is really cruel is not telling the mother these things and leaving her to find out after the fact. In fact that is one of the most horrid things I can think of that people can do to someone.
Yes at some point, birth, a fetus is a person.
We are not talking about 3 seconds before birth, stop the hyperbole. We are talking about trans vaginal ultrasounds that are done usually within the first 8 weeks of pregnancy. The same time period that 66% of abortions are preformed.
How do they inform patients of the risk of other operations? Do you really not know patients are informed of the risks of procedures already. They talk to the doctor, they are given information to read.
Again, this is within the first trimester, usually the first 8 weeks. No one is saying they should not be informed. They are saying a vaginal ultrasound done withing the first 8 weeks, detailing the sonogram and listening to the heartbeat is not informing the patient of the risks of the procedure.
Do they do this for every pregnant woman. Are they informed of the potential risk of pregnancy/birth, potential birth defects and complications, information on postpartum depression, perhaps show every pregnant woman pictures of Andrea Yates deceased children so they know the potential side effects.
Just stop with the informed BS. Women know what a fetus is, they know what abortion is. We live in a time information technology. When a woman has an abortion she has in most all cases already made an informed decision.
That's why fathers should be able to choose an abortion if they don't want a baby. Since some balk at that, allow fathers to opt out of any parental responsibility including child support. If a baby is "inconvenient" for some women, it's also "inconvenient" for some men.
Make up your mind! You've been railing against abortion this entire thread (as is your right), but now you've decided you're in favor of it, after all?
I don't think you're as naive as you're trying to sound. You're playing dumb, obviously. Because men DO choose, with their female partners, to have abortions. All the time.
This idea you seem to have of the callous woman who chooses, on her own and with no second thought, to end a pregnancy, while coldly ignoring the man's desperate pleas not to, is nothing but a trite, tired trope. I'm guessing upwards of 90% of couples make a joint decision to abort. And, what, you've never heard of men who encourage their girlfriends/wives to have an abortion?
I think you're using the issue of abortion as a vehicle for another purpose.
Make up your mind! You've been railing against abortion this entire thread (as is your right), but now you've decided you're in favor of it, after all?
I don't think you're as naive as you're trying to sound. You're playing dumb, obviously. Because men DO choose, with their female partners, to have abortions. All the time.
This idea you seem to have of the callous woman who chooses, on her own and with no second thought, to end a pregnancy, while coldly ignoring the man's desperate pleas not to, is nothing but a trite, tired trope. I'm guessing upwards of 90% of couples make a joint decision to abort. And, what, you've never heard of men who encourage their girlfriends/wives to have an abortion?
I think you're using the issue of abortion as a vehicle for another purpose.
Crazy isn't it that people want to ignore the fact that its mostly either a joint decision after much deliberation or its the man who tries to persuade the woman to abort or a woman decides to abort because the father wants nothing to do with her or the baby.
SMH.
Killing a helpless dependent being is not a "Win" regardless of the prerequisites.
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.
