atrocities commited by Dr. Kermit Gosnell--Massive failure of govt

[Atreus21]

There is no exception.

Yes there is basically a "hearing" after the fact that determines if your life was in jeopardy but that is pretty much nonsense.

I would not trust any medical board under the guidelines that Partial birth abortion is unnecessary to preserve the health of the mother.

Not sure I understand. A doctor accused of performing an unlawful partial-birth abortion is entitled to a hearing to determine whether or not the woman's life was at stake. You're saying that's nonsense?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Eff no. That's around the time you can accurately screen for things like Down Syndrome.

Really? I would think that Downs syndrome would be detectable within days.

 

[mchammer187]

Not sure I understand. A doctor accused of performing an unlawful partial-birth abortion is entitled to a hearing to determine whether or not the woman's life was at stake. You're saying that's nonsense?

I'm saying the law specifically says it does not recognize partial birth abortion as ever being necessary to save the life of the mother in the statute.

From what I can tell the law says that you must go before a board in the event that it occurs not if you are accused of wrongdoing so there is a presumption of guilt.

These two things definitely are contradictory I find it nonsense that anyone that has a partial birth abortion will ever be vindicated because the statute chooses to explicitly state that partial birth abortions are never medically necessary.

 

[Atreus21]

I'm saying the law specifically says it does not recognize partial birth abortion as ever being necessary to save the life of the mother in the statute.

From what I can tell the law says that you must go before a board in the event that it occurs not if you are accused of wrongdoing so there is a presumption of guilt.

These two things definitely are contradictory I find it nonsense that anyone that has a partial birth abortion will ever be vindicated because the statute chooses to explicitly state that partial birth abortions are never medically necessary.

I'm sorry, but asking doctors to prove that the mother's life was at stake is an acceptable compromise to the prevention of a child having its brain sucked out.

 

[mchammer187]

I'm sorry, but asking doctors to prove that the mother's life was at stake is an acceptable compromise to the prevention of a child having its brain sucked out.

Except that is not what the law does and offers zero protection even the mother's life were at stake.

 

[lopri]

I don't see much of an abortion issue here but a monster issue. Whether the doctor was practicing penal enlargement or breast implants, it would be just as gross and scary. (Though abortion certainly adds to it) I would find out every state official responsible and hold them accountable.

 

[Atreus21]

Except that is not what the law does and offers zero protection even the mother's life were at stake.

I guess you forgot about the guttmacher link...?

 

[mchammer187]

I guess you forgot about the guttmacher link...?

The guttmacher link reiterates what I've been saying all along.

Although the Stenberg decision momentarily stalled the legislation pending before Congress, within two years its congressional champions had introduced a new version that purportedly addressed these problems. First, they claimed to have eliminated any possibility that the ban would place an undue burden on women's ability to obtain previability abortions by including what they argued to be a more precise definition of "partial-birth" abortion (requiring, among other things, the performance of an "overt act" intended to kill the partially delivered fetus). They further said they had addressed the health issue by including in the legislation extensive congressional "findings" that "partial-birth" abortion is never necessary to preserve a woman's health, that it poses serious risks to women's health and that it lies outside the standard of medical care. The "findings," moreover, asserted a complicated legal theory explaining why the Supreme Court's recent decision did not bar Congress's efforts and why Congress's factual conclusions were superior to the courts' and entitled to judicial deference. The legislation passed both the House and Senate by overwhelming margins.

If you leave language in the bill stating that than it is garbage.