I thought the insistence that the Ignorance Only sex ed that FORCED teachers to provide medically, scientifically inaccurate information about topics like contraceptive failure was bad.
I thought the attempts to legislate that pharmacists could decide to enforce THEIR beliefs on patients, by deciding what prescriptions they wanted to fill and what medications they wanted to deny you, or that they could over-ride your doctor's decisions if they felt like it was bad.
And of course the attempts to deny contraception prescription coverage to women, that was bad.
Then there were the efforts to repeal equal pay, that was bad; and the refusal to support protection for women against violence, that was bad.
And I thought the requirement that abortion providers provide inaccurate, state mandated false and inaccurate information to women seeking reproductive care was bad, because those things ARE bad, they're terrible. They are state ordered LIES, all of the above, done to make the religious right and the anti-abortion right happy. Because nothing says right wing like lies institutionalized by law...which is fascism. They should be ashamed of themselves for being so anti-American, for being such liars. They should be ashamed, because it should be obvious to them when they lie that they are doing something wrong, that their position is not a valid one if they have to lie to promote it, to get it accepted.
And make no mistake, ALL of those ARE BAD, really really bad and the consequences of those lies are hardest on women. The right wing are becoming the party of lies, of legislation that intentionally, deliberately, and manipulatively LIES, lies to control people, especially women.
But this newest abomination from the right, in Kansas, but occurring in other states as well, may be the very worst of the bad bunch so far. It is a reflection of the most invasive, most interfering, most paternalistic and controlling kind of government intrusion into the privacy of the patient and doctor relationship. It is the most offensive kind of big government, coming of course from those who give lip service to freedom while taking it away, and who give lip service to 'small government' while making the worst kind of big government that over-rides personal choice if it is choice they don't like. This is the desideratum of the current crop of GOP presidential candidates, especially Santorum; heck this must be a wet dream politically for Santorum.
Cross-posted from Common Dreams (emphasis added in the body of the text is mine - DG)
Published on Monday, March 12, 2012 by Blog of Rights (ACLU)
Kansas to Pregnant Women: "A Little Lie from Your Doctor Won't Hurt You"Yes, you read this right. The Right Wing Extremists want to enact legislation - god knows how, but it seems like a good idea to them - to make legal by calling it an act of conscience, what would be under any other circumstances and by any other standard of professional conduct be considered medical malpractice. They want to jeapordize any basis for trust in a medical professional. They want to risk harm to people, real existing people. This is where the much vaunted big tent on the right becomes the straight jacket of the insane asylum. The lunatics have hijacked conservativism, and this is the result. This is where radical right wingers separate from moderate conservatives, and from the rest of us.
by Jennifer Dalven
It's what every pregnant woman I know dreads. Going into that big ultrasound, having the ultrasound tech, who had been so chatty, suddenly go silent. Having her do sweep after sweep across your belly without saying another word, until finally, she gets up and solemnly says, "I am going to get the doctor."
As far as pregnancy nightmares go, I thought that was one of the worst. But now politicians in Kansas are giving pregnant women and their partners something new to worry about. Buried in a sweeping anti-abortion bill is a provision that would immunize a doctor who discovers that a baby will be born with a devastating condition and deliberately withholds that information from his patient. That's right. If the bill passes, a doctor who opposes abortion could decide to lie about the results of your blood tests, your ultrasound, your cvs or your amnio. Lie to you so that you won't have information that might lead you to decide to end your pregnancy or that might lead you to learn more about your child's condition so that you are prepared to be the best parent you can be to your child.
Now, I have been working for a long time defending the right of a pregnant woman to make the best decision for herself and her family, whether that is continuing the pregnancy, adoption, or abortion, based on full, accurate information. I thought I had seen just about every manner of government intrusion into those fundamentally personal and private decisions. I thought I was past the point of being shocked and outraged. But as a mother who has been through those ultrasounds myself, the thought that my doctor could choose to withhold this information from me and take this decision away from me and my husband ... well, let's just say it really touched a nerve.
And, unfortunately, it's not just Kansas. Other states motivated by anti-abortion zeal are jumping on the it's-ok-for-doctors-to lie-to-their-patients-to-prevent-them-from-having-an-abortion bandwagon. Oklahoma recently passed a similar law. And, the Arizona legislature is considering a similar bill.
But I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Despite the rhetoric of anti-abortion politicians about how all these restrictions are necessary to ensure that women's decisions are well-informed, it's never been about that. Doctors who provide abortions already work hard to ensure that every woman has the information she needs to make the best decision for herself and her family. What these bills are about is politicians who think they know better than women and who are trying to impose their own views on abortion on a woman and her family regardless of the circumstances: That's what's behind those now infamous ultrasound bills in places like Virginia, Idaho, and Pennsylvania. That's what's behind the bills in Georgia and Arizona that would ban abortion at the point when a woman often learns about a devastating diagnosis. And that is what is behind so many of the other bills working their way through the state legislatures right now. The Kansas bill is, in a way, just more upfront about it.
Well, enough is enough. We may not all agree about abortion, but we can all agree that these decisions ought to be made by a woman and her family, not a politician. So, whether you are a man or a woman; whether you are already a parent or think you might become one in the future; whether you are blissfully pregnant or unhappily so, if you care about your right to make your own decisions, I ask that you help get the word out. Share this blog on Facebook and Twitter. Send an email with this link to the President of the Kansas Senate. Tell the politicians all over the country to stop interfering in a family's personal and private decisions.
Hello Dog Gone,
ReplyDeleteI have to question the ethics of the doctor who disregards his Hippocratic Oath which vows never to intentionally harm a person through medical means.
I then have to ask how long would it take for the word to get out with women that this doctor is not one to be seen by and the loss of revenue puts him out of business; law suits or not.
Incredible, isn't it? This just gets worse and worse. Every time I think the right-wing has gotten as crazy as they can possibly get, they outdo themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe problem Engineer of Knowledge is that in many cases depending on where one is located, there are not always a lot of doctors from which to choose, particulaly in rural areas where keeping small town doctors around is a huge problem.
ReplyDeleteAnd then there is the problem of which doctors are covered by a woman's particular insurance coverage. The medical associations are all pushing against this kind of legislation, but it is passing Republican legislatures, and Republican governors are EAGER to sign it.
Just as bad is legislation that would allow an employer to probe a woman's sex life, to find out if she is using contraception for therapeutic use, or for family planning / birth control. The employer would have the thumbs up or down on the provision of that contraception under right wing legislation, and would even make it a legal basis in the most extreme versions of this legislation, as grounds to fire a woman if she used contraceptives for birth control.
Presumably that would also be the case if the woman used a birth control pill BOTH for contraception AND a therapeutic use simultanesouly.
This is pure and simply culture war on women, nothing more and nothing less.
Hello Dog Gone,
ReplyDeleteYou have brought up a good point about the lack of choice for women in rural areas. My wife is the office manager of one of the few local doctors in the area in which we live.
I too have a recent posting dealing with this same subject.
http://engineerofknowledge.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/the-american-republicans-war-on-women/
I invite all to visit and follow up on this subject.
I'd love to post a comment on it; I've been trying to post comments on Muddy's blog, and Laci's blog, but they keep getting dumped, and I can't figure out what the problem is.
ReplyDeleteIt is very frustrating. I'd love to comment on your blog - if I can figure out what the problem is that I'm having. (very frustrating)
DG, withholding informaiton isn't the same as lying. Withholding is not saying something, lying is intentionally deceiving.
ReplyDeleteNow, that's a slight distinction, but when dealing with seeking to be fair, it is important to be accurate.
Any doctor who FAILS to disclose Down's Syndrome (or some other serious defect) is a scumbag, but apparently wouldn't be violating the law. A doctor who knowingly provided FALSE statments would be at risk of malpractice, because the patient would be acting on false information in chosing their course of treatment. Sheilding them if they don't volunteer something is certainly bad, shielding them to allow them to lie is something else entirely. What about if they lie about having cancer, about having alzheimers? This is a slope the legislators in these states need to very seriously consider, both the slope about withholding (really, REALLY Bad), and lying (totally, utterly wrong).
Hello Dog Gone,
ReplyDeleteUPDATE: 03-19-2012 6:42 PM
Tennessee Republican Lunacy breaks onto the scene!!
A new bill moving through the Tennessee House of Representatives would require the state to publish the names of each doctor who performs an abortion and detailed statistics about the woman having the procedure, which opponents worry will spur anti-abortion violence in the state.
The Life Defense Act of 2012, sponsored by state Rep. Matthew Hill (R-Jonesborough), mandates that the Tennessee Department of Health make detailed demographic information about every woman who has an abortion available to the public, including her age, race, county, marital status, education level, number of children, the location of the procedure and how many times she has been pregnant. Each report would also have to include the name of the doctor who performed the procedure.
Just as Dr. George Tiller on May 31, 2009 was shot and killed by Scott Roeder, a self appointed anti-abortion activist taking the law into his own hands. Dr. Tiller was killed during a Sunday morning service at his church, where he was serving as an usher. In Scott Roeder’s sick mind, he could not figure out why he was not seen as a hero instead of a murdering criminal.
Just as Dr. Tiller's killing was labeled as an act of domestic terrorism, and an assassination, we could very well have an outbreak of Tennessee Crazies taking the law into their own hands being justified in their sick minds with this Life Defense Act of 2012 bill.
Maybe someone should propose a law mandating the name and address of Tennessee Representatives who support this Life Defense Act of 2012 law, their wives and children, where they shop, work, and go to school. That way if someone disagrees with this Life Defense Act of 2012, they can change the vote before it is cast in the State House.
Of course I am not in favor of this last statement because it is just as crazy and dangerous as the Life Defense Act of 2012 law being proposed in Tennessee today.
I can only hope that the 51% majority, the population of women in this country, will turn out and cast their votes to protect their and their daughter’s interest. It is IMPORTANT!!
I feel sorry for anyone that would make the choice to end a pregnancy based on an ultrasound. It's a sad time to live in America. Please take the time to look up the rates of abortion by state and count the number of the unborn, the baby who will never be held or see their mom. It's sad that anyone would want to fight so hard to keep murder legal and justified. My God be with you. Also, please take the time to view photos online of abortions. There are real fingers and toes and a face and voice that went to each part of THAT BABY!
ReplyDelete1. No one makes the decision to end a pregnancy on the basis of an ultrasound - or the lack of one either. That is the most superficial and trivial attitude, the most demeaning and patronizing approach to a decision women make, and you should be ashamed of yourself for espousing it. Women make careful, balanced, reasoned and moral decisions, and are quite capable in consultation with their physicians of determining their futures and the outcome of their pregnancy without the interference of other people intruding their beliefs into that decision.
ReplyDelete2. It is not murder, nor is an embryo a person.
3. I don't need to look at photos online; those are rigged for sensationalism. Rather part of my sex education included the opportunity see human fetal cadavers in formaldahyde. I have been with a friend who had an abortion during the procedure.
4. It is time we applied a single standard of life, the same one we apply to death - brain activity.
5. It is appropriate that we treat women with the same care and respect that we treat all other full and ocmplete human beings, which includes that we do not require them to make their bodies subordinate to other lives. We do not require them to donate a kidney, or blood, or bone marrow so that someone else may live. It is entirely a voluntary decision, and alsways should be. In the same moral and ethical decision we should not require them to be the host body to a developing embryo against their will. It is a violation of their bodily integrity. If they do not end their pregnancy within the time before there is brain activity, they are presumed to have given consent for their bodies to be pregnant.
5. If a decision is a moral one, it will be so by both religious and non-religious ethical standards and reasoning. The action of the anti-abortion extremists are not. Waving around the word god does not make them any more right or righteous. YOU Amanda are no more moral or righteous or good or wise than other women, and may well be less so.
6. There is no integrity in the anti-abortion movement, which is violent, which is thuggish, and which engages in rampant lying --- like requiring doctors to provide false information in the guise of medical fact. For example, there is NO correlation whatsoever to a woman having an abortion and the incidence of breast cancer.
7. There is absolutely NO justification or basis in fact for the assertion that personhood occurs at conception, nor is there any way of KNOWING when it occurs. Further, it demonstrates the lack of factual biology information on which you act.
8. I am particularly deeply offened at the lies that include misinformation such as it is rare for pregnancy to occur from rape. That is not only factually entirely inaccurate, a calculated lie in fact, it is profoundly offensive.
I feel sorry for someone like you who makes their decisions on mawkish emotion instead of reason, and is so smug and has so little respect for that same right to act on one's conscience and beleif that you would deprive others of that same right if they differ from you -- even when they do so with greater intelligence using facts.
You are sad, Amanda, and what is worse, you are wrong and are trying to do something very bad to other women - deny them the right you are exercising in forming your belief and conscience.
Amanda,
ReplyDeleteFirst, welcome to Penigma. Please comment often, we enjoy and welcome opposing views (DG's response to you is impassioned, but not intended as insulting, I'm sure).
Second, I appreciate your request to God to show me mercy, I pray for the same for you. Neither you, nor I, though, know the mind of God. We can infer from scripture at best.
Doing that reveals this, that at the time of Christ's life, human beings considered the concept of "quickening" as a reflection of the life growing inside the womb as beginning to be "alive". Yet, as far as we know, no one was ever put to death or punished at the time of Christ for the act of murder if they acted in a way which caused the death of an unborn fetus.
Clearly we also know that Romans aborted fetuses. Given that, and deriving from the fact that Christ was TOTALLY silent on this point, it appears that Christ's mind did not dwell on this, nor did he feel his Father needed to have some comment made on the point.
I understand you are sad about the state of affairs in the United States. I whole-heartedly agree with you. It is sad that we have a nation where the wealthiest 2000 people have more in assets than the poorest 2.5 Billion people in the world, that we have a nation which, despite being about 2.5% of the world's population, consumes 25% of the world's energy and 15% of the world's food. We are gluttons, we eat and consume to excess, while we walk over/step over the hundreds of thousands (or more) homeless in our midst. We are the wealthiest nation on the planet and as John Mellenkamp said, "We shame ourselves to watch people like this live."
Going back to scripture then, there is one passage in the bible which reads that in speaking to Moses, God said "Moses, I knew you before you were in the womb and I named you." There is no basis in fact in claiming that this means God sees life as begining at conception. At best this is a parable making the point that God was aware of the coming of a deliverer and he was aware of who and when - BEFORE Moses was in the womb. It makes no statement about the start of life.
ReplyDeleteEqually important, I'm sure you value your religious freedom, as do I. And while I am decidedly a Christian, I do not relish the idea that shuld Judaism or Mormanism or Islam someday become the predominant religion of the land, I do not prefer nor would I accept laws passed from their orthodoxy. For example, what if there were a law which required you to wear a burkah or carry a prayer rug? Would you agree to do so? If not, why then do you have the right to demand that other people accept your scripturally baseless definition of life - one which appears to have sprung from the edicts of religious figures (such as Pope John), but hardly from Christ himself? The Papacy may claim to be the innerant word of God, but I do not accept it, nor do most Catholics, let alone Christians... But more importantly, even IF we agreed with the Pope (and by the way, I assume you don't use ANY birth control, correct?) - anyway, even IF we agreed with the Pope, we have NO right to require others to conform themselves to the edicts of the Papacy. Are we saying the President should take his orders from the Vatican now?
Finally, since it has no basis in scripture, I do not find it supportable to claim life begins at conception BUT, in reading say Matthew 25 - I DO find that we are sorely lacking in compassion for our fellow men and women. We FAIL to give our neighbor water when he thirsts, we fail to succor him when he is hurt, we FAIL to visit him in prison - we step over him when he is homeless.
You seem willing to pass judgement on my conduct with respect to pictures of fetuses which (OBVIOUSLY) form like the babies they will become in the womb, that's not exactly news - but SINCE you have decided to comport yourself as my judge - in violation of the word of our lord, I will only ask you, do you spend as much time worrying about the welfare of those in prison as you do of those God has not named as lives?
Amanda, I was remiss in not first welcoming you to Penigma.
ReplyDeleteI encourage you to view this abc. com news video. It addresses the very real kinds of decisions women and their partners and medical care providers face, decisions far more complex and vital and real than arguments about having faces and sensational accusations of murder.
This video represents the very real harm your position does, the insult and injury it does to people.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/20-week-abortion-ban-nebraska-oklahoma-fetus-feel/story?id=13116214