As Ohio restricts abortions, 10-year-old girl travels to Indiana for procedure

"A physician who performs a medical procedure as described in this division shall declare, in a written document, that the medical procedure is necessary, to the best of the physician's reasonable medical judgment, to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman."

Seems pretty straight forward as not requiring their to be a previous medical condition. Though I do acknowledge that they also request documentation should that be the case.

You suspect that most doctors in Ohio are not qualified to sign off on an abortion?

Really?

So they are what? Incompetent?

If most doctors are not qualified to sign off on an abortion then are they even qualified doctors? Something smells like bs in that statement.

Go figure.

Now are they simply not wanting to sign off? Why not? Are they *******s? Scared?

Again. Sounds like a huge stretch either way.

 

https://www.livescience.com/19584-10-year-birth.html

This is the opinion of how life threatening a 10 year old giving birth is back in 2012.

It seems to me, given the opinion of the doctors in this article that there is substantial risk to the health of the mother who is 10 in going through with child birth.

But somehow alllll the doctors in Ohio seem to suddenly not be qualified to have an opinion on the subject?

Sounds like Ohio needs better doctors.

 

How did this 10 year girl get raped?

 

If you can point me to the post where I referred to those laws I will happily do so. No inferring or assuming, direct reference.

Thanks.

 

Or you DID, until the MAGA COTUS determines dentistry isn't a right specifically mentioned in the KONS-TIT-U-TION and then your state bans it...

 

Erect Penis.... Tiny little vagina.... Crying..... Ejaculation...

 

"If that incubator happens to be a 10 year old barely able to comprehend the notion of pregnancy and in danger of serious health consequences that is just her bad luck."

I'm sorry...is this not you making a ridiculous and untrue statement eluding to Ohio's abortion laws?

 

Yet again, the phrase "Serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" has a specific definition within the legislation. Nobody is free to interpret the phrase however they think it correct (or even intended), they have to follow the definition within the law. I literally quoted that definition, with the key words highlighted, and linked the legislation it is from. I don't know how much more clearly it could be presented to you.

You are aware that medicine works on specialisation? Other than for uncomplicated medical abortions (which family doctors can typically handle), they would require O&G specialists to make the clinical judgement. Other doctors might be technically capable of reaching the correct clinical answer but they wouldn't be in the practical position to do so.

 

what is the difference, why should one be allowed to abort and the other not?

 

never said it did, but anyone that needs an abortion would already be pregnant... otherwise they would not need the abortion

thus a rape victim that needs an abortion to not have her rapists baby is already pregnant from her rapist

 

Sounds spot on to me... not sure what you find ridiculous or untrue...

Except everything true...

 

"(K) "Serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" means any medically diagnosed condition that so complicates the pregnancy of the woman as to directly or indirectly cause the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function. A medically diagnosed condition that constitutes a "serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function" includes pre-eclampsia, inevitable abortion, and premature rupture of the membranes, may include, but is not limited to, diabetes and multiple sclerosis, and does not include a condition related to the woman's mental health."

Because it makes the statement "may include, but is not limited to" And then fires off examples...all this declaration means is that a woman can't cheap out and claim "my mental health" Because this section gives examples of physical issues, but then makes a specific statement against the woman's mental health.

That's all that does.

The 10 year old in this fictitious story should absolutely be granted an abortion for many reasons one of which is that her survival cannot be guaranteed and the risk being substantially higher then a fully grown adult female.

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rth-isnt-just-horrifying-its-life-threatening

Seems fairly based in medical science the dangers posed to a 10 year old that would be VERY EASY for any competent doctor to sign off for an abortion. Had this story been true of course.

 

Yes, examples of medically diagnosed conditions! The reason a ten year old probably shouldn't be carrying a pregnancy to term won't (initially at least) be due to any medically diagnosed condition but due to their fundamental physiological make-up. That would not meet the criteria in the legislation as written (I'd suggest that is by design, since the whole point is to significantly reduce availability of abortion, but without consideration or care for edge cases like this).

But it also doesn't let doctors consider relevant mental health conditions, regardless of how clearly diagnosed and serious they might be. Another example of putting in a hard-and-fast law without any scope for considering edge cases or exceptions.

It was, right up to this law being implemented. That is the problem.

 

"A physician who performs a medical procedure as described in this division shall declare, in a written document, that the medical procedure is necessary, to the best of the physician's reasonable medical judgment, to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or to prevent a serious risk of the substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman."

The 10 year old would fall under this statement of conditions. This abortion would have happened had this story been real.

 

Poverty is a whopping 75% of the impetus to have an abortion

What are the “pro-lifers” doing about poverty?
View attachment 179775
What are they doing to ensure LARCs are affordable and easily obtainable?

 

i

I think they want to sentence mothers who try to get an abortion to death. They would let mass shooters use them for target practice.

 

Hmmmmm - and who judges the declaration? I mean if it is just a piece of paper being filed somewhere then it opens the door to allowing abortion for basically any reason. All the woman has to do is walk into the office and say “The pregnancy is making me suicidal if I do not have an abortion I will kill myself”. Doctor documents this and files it in the patients chart. Who then gets to read it? Can the police seize those documents or are they protected by HIPPA?

I ask because THAT a is what happened here in QLD

https://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/na...-protects-abortion-doctors-20090901-f5qf.html

 

Because you are talking rubbish

Many women may not even be sure they were raped thanks to practices like using GHB and “stealthing”


Most women are raped by someone they know

 

Who judges? You were not there so how can you judge how much coercion there was?

 

I have quoted the stats from the pro-abortion institutions.

 

I am not arguing how horrible is rape or who commits them the most. Do focus on what is being discussed.

 

I can't read what you are citing nor did you provide a link.

But here


https://abort73.com/abortion_facts/us_abortion_statistics/

So now that the people will finally have a say in abortion, you know democracy, lets deal with the 98.5% first and then the rare extenuating circumstances.

 

And it is from one of the more notorious “pro-life” sites AND it is 2005. But thanks for pointing out even THEY quote Guttmacher


Because THIS is also from Guttmacher

https://www.bbc.com/news/59583311

 

What are the women doing to not get pregnant? There are tons of birth control methods out there even keeping it in their pants.

 

I call BS.

1. A pregnant 10 year old is a rape victim. Yet, there is "no mention of criminal investigation, no police involvement, not even a town where this allegedly occurred."
   
2. "An unnamed alleged "child abuse" doctor, called Dr. Caitlyn Bernard (an abortionist in Indiana) to ask for help. But any doctor who knows of abuse would be required to also call law enforcement. There should be a criminal investigation going involving Ohio DFS and police."
   
3. The "TIMING of this horrific story is" perfect. "Roe v. Wade was just overturned. The" lying fake news "media is desperate for stories to push the pro-abortion narrative, stoke fear, anger, and division. They love this."
   
4. DrCaitlynBernard, "the only source, is an abortionist and has been in the NYT participating in an anti-Trump hit piece and is clearly an activist. She has a stake in preserving abortion, it literally pays her bills."
   
5. "There's no way to verify Bernard's claim. She has doctor patient confidentiality. No one can FOIA her. The media won't ask any questions and even if they did she wouldn't answer. There is no proof that this 10-year-old even exists and yet the media ran with it full tilt."
   
6. "Lawmakers in OH should demand an investigation into who raped this child. They are the only ones who can get information through DFS and help the girl seek justice for the crime, if it happened. Did it?"
   
7. "DrCaitlynBernard got a call from another doctor asking for help for a horribly abused child and her first instinct was to call the media?" Not the police?

This story is bull crap.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1544426366837342208.html