There's been a lot of discussion about the state-rape bills forcing women to have ultrasounds if they want to get an abortion. The rationale was that women should be fully informed before going through with it. Here's a fun flip-side to that. Upwards of 80% of women choose to abort if they receive a Down Syndrome diagnosis for their unborn child. This bill seeks to solve that problem by simply allowing doctors to lie to their patients and pretend there isn't a problem. So much for making sure women are fully informed about their pregnancies.
I just realized that it's anti-abortion AND tort reform. If they can figure out a way to tie taxes into it, they'll have a nice hat trick on their hands.
In reading the link you posted I am not sure this has anything to do with down syndrome. The description of the bill is vague.
It has everything to do with not telling a woman if her child will be born with some birth defect so as to prevent her from making the choice to have an abortion. Down Syndrome comes under the heading of birth defects.
Maybe. But based on the link it could just refer to a doctor not noticing a defect. I have doubts that it would refer to downs syndrome namely because there is a specific test for downs syndrome. And it would be fraud if the doctor was to misrepresent the results of the test.
Sites pretend to be news site but don't link primary sources should please to be leaving internet now.
Yeah, without the bill itself it's hard to know whether the new story linked is accurate. However, lying to patients, or withholding important information, is pretty unethical.
Well looking at the bill it doesnt seem like it would cover Downs Syndrome because it would violate a law to falsify the result of the test. Its not something that you randomly notice and keep to yourself.
No. Read the Bill before you speculate. It says "D. This section does not apply to any civil action for damages for an intentional or grossly negligent act or omission, including an act or omission that violates a criminal law." Performing a test and lying about the results would be fraud. So this bill would not protect it.
Clearly the appropriate response to this new reality is to abort all the things from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. As an actual comment, there's no way this will stand. It's wrong on so very very very many levels.
They've tried similar shit before in other states tbh, and none of them went through. Most memorable was a Virginia (iirc, was awhile back) law that would have flat-out forbidden a doctor from divulging information to their patient if they suspected the patient would use that information to decide to get an abortion. Then again, Arizona.
This bill would not prohibit a doctor from communicating with his patient about birth defects or other issues with the fetus. It simply eliminates a cause of action for "wrongful birth" unless the doctor acts in an intentional or grossly negligent way. A useful data point would be whether doctors have historically been more likely to withhold such information in the nine states that prohibit wrongful birth claims and the 16 (I think) others that haven't recognized such a claim so far. My understanding is that only 25 states have recognized wrongful birth and/or wrongful life claims.
That's awful generous considering Nancy Barto is both anti-choice and anti-Gay Marriage, also she supports that "papers please" law The test case for this law was a Florida case of a boy born with no arms and one leg, the parents won 4.5 million.
I don't doubt that the sponsor's motives are suspect. That doesn't mean the bill will do what she or people on the other side of the issue assume it will do - the bill says what it says. I'm sure she would have preferred a full-on gag rule, but she knows that would be constitutionally suspect.
But it's unnecessary at best. At worst it's absolutely disrespectful to women, as if they will get an abortion at the mere mention of a problem. As if abortion is a battle between people who love abortion and people who are desperately trying to stop them but the gubbermint and lawyers have tied their hands! As innocuous as this may be on it's face, I don't like people with such a clear agenda should be making the laws, I remember too many pharmacists not handing out birth control, and that nurse that repeatedly removed IUD "accidentally" before giving an anti-contraceptive speech.
Curse you, internets! The full text of the bill seems to put the lie to my original post. I do think that it gives a bit too much cover for doctors who might try to pull this nonsense, though, as it would be quite difficult to prove intent in a case like this. Of course, that applies with or without the law, so perhaps you're correct in saying that it's useless.
There's been far too much hyperbole around this bill out there; I was especially disappointed to see Rachel Maddow jumping aboard the panic train (although she has gotten a bit less intellectually honest since she's been on TV to compete with the other talking heads). The timing of the bill doesn't help, coming on the heels of Virginia's vaginal ultrasound thing, and the birth control fight, and the Limbaugh thing. Make no mistake - this is certainly part and parcel of the Right's war on choice (and women), but it's not going to be as effective as either side would have you believe.
Welp. Sometimes a cow or a pig dies and y'know what they do on the farm? Make lemonade outta lemons! Or in this case, barbecue outta animal corpses! So as a rider, they should add that women who die of septic shock due to leaving a rotting fetus in their bellies should be eaten.
I see no problem with banning post viability abortions other then to save the life of the mother, but stuff like this is idiotic.
That's riding it pretty close to the line there, bub. This is D&D. Keep your personal attacks in your pocket.
We're just shy of 100 years away from the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. Maybe we can repeal it for the centennial celebration!
Arizona doubles down on the crazy This is just mindboggling. I honestly have no idea how to parse this as an act of sane and rational people.
How would an employer even know that you had bought the birth control in the first place? Isn't that sort of information confidential?
