There is so much misinformation and inflammatory articles going around regarding this it’s unreal.

The reality is that "late term abortions" are NOT what the mother wants to happen. 99% of elective abortions are prior to 24 weeks. No one is "celebrating" that a healthy woman with a healthy pregnancy, who randomly wakes up at 40 weeks, goes to the hospital for delivery but instead decides to terminate her pregnancy.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017...veCJD3D0gk

Doctors have their own oath they must uphold and the bulk of the bill simply moves legislation that addresses abortion from the criminal code to the health and safety code, where it belongs. The paragraph of the bill that has been grossly misrepresented clearly states that anything beyond 24 weeks must be because either the fetus died or the woman’s life or health are at risk. It also states the doctor must use good faith and professional judgment based on the facts of a particular case, as we hope they always would, according to their oath.

Abortion is a medical procedure. The more restrictive laws in some states include non-viable fetuses who cannot survive outside of the womb, because they are missing lungs, or the head did not develop. In those states - where everyone knows the fetus is not viable, women who thought they would be mothers are required to carry to term. This also includes instances where the fetus has died, and women are not permitted to have an "abortion" to remove the fetus where a miscarriage has not naturally happened.

When women reside in those states that restrict "abortion" to include the actual medical procedure instead of specific circumstances regarding viable pregnancies, those women either just have to wait (usually creating a situation that endangers their health, where one did not exist), or travel somewhere so that they can get the medical treatment (usually prescriptions or a shot) to induce the abortion. Any way you look at it, it's a horrible situation for these women to be put in.

Just within my own circle, there is a woman (in TN) who found out the fetus had died at 8 months (no heartbeat or other activity) in utero. Because they were past a certain week in the pregnancy, could not get an elective abortion in TN and had to wait, carrying around a dead fetus inside them, hoping their bodies would spontaneously abort. I cannot imagine the horror, trauma, and sadness they experienced, and would not wish it upon anyone.

The "celebration" is that women do not have to suffer like that in the state of NY.

(01-24-2019 12:54 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  Just within my own circle, there is a woman (in TN) who found out the fetus had died at 8 months (no heartbeat or other activity) in utero. Because they were past a certain week in the pregnancy, could not get an elective abortion in TN and had to wait, carrying around a dead fetus inside them, hoping their bodies would spontaneously abort. I cannot imagine the horror, trauma, and sadness they experienced, and would not wish it upon anyone.

The "celebration" is that women do not have to suffer like that in the state of NY.

If I remember correctly, the TN law didn't ban abortions after a certain point. The doctors just had to be able to prove the baby wasn't viable (which I would certainly think zero heartbeat or other activity would qualify) or that the mother's life was in immediate jeopardy.

Horrible if someone suffered having to carry their dead child for a month, especially if they might not have had to do so.

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

(01-24-2019 12:54 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  There is so much misinformation and inflammatory articles going around regarding this it’s unreal.

The reality is that "late term abortions" are NOT what the mother wants to happen. 99% of elective abortions are prior to 24 weeks. No one is "celebrating" that a healthy woman with a healthy pregnancy, who randomly wakes up at 40 weeks, goes to the hospital for delivery but instead decides to terminate her pregnancy.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017...veCJD3D0gk

Doctors have their own oath they must uphold and the bulk of the bill simply moves legislation that addresses abortion from the criminal code to the health and safety code, where it belongs. The paragraph of the bill that has been grossly misrepresented clearly states that anything beyond 24 weeks must be because either the fetus died or the woman’s life or health are at risk. It also states the doctor must use good faith and professional judgment based on the facts of a particular case, as we hope they always would, according to their oath.

Abortion is a medical procedure. The more restrictive laws in some states include non-viable fetuses who cannot survive outside of the womb, because they are missing lungs, or the head did not develop. In those states - where everyone knows the fetus is not viable, women who thought they would be mothers are required to carry to term. This also includes instances where the fetus has died, and women are not permitted to have an "abortion" to remove the fetus where a miscarriage has not naturally happened.

When women reside in those states that restrict "abortion" to include the actual medical procedure instead of specific circumstances regarding viable pregnancies, those women either just have to wait (usually creating a situation that endangers their health, where one did not exist), or travel somewhere so that they can get the medical treatment (usually prescriptions or a shot) to induce the abortion. Any way you look at it, it's a horrible situation for these women to be put in.

Just within my own circle, there is a woman (in TN) who found out the fetus had died at 8 months (no heartbeat or other activity) in utero. Because they were past a certain week in the pregnancy, could not get an elective abortion in TN and had to wait, carrying around a dead fetus inside them, hoping their bodies would spontaneously abort. I cannot imagine the horror, trauma, and sadness they experienced, and would not wish it upon anyone.

The "celebration" is that women do not have to suffer like that in the state of NY.

New York already allowed abortions after 24 weeks to protect the mother. Also, this law allows mid-wives and physician assistants to perform some abortions. So it can only be assumed if someone murders a pregnant woman the murderer will no longer be charged with multiple counts.

(01-24-2019 11:06 AM)Claw Wrote:  You have one poor child that lives through the procedure. That child may have standing to challenge the law.

This bill also repealed the protection of a child that survives an abortion. In other words if the baby fights for its life and survives being yanked from the womb it can be killed in a more efficient way outside the mother. Pure infanticide. Pure evil. Made legal by these evil people.

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

The abortion defenders have arrived. Ironic that they’re the same ones who lose their shtt over guns and buy into the media’s misinformation on that subject

(01-24-2019 01:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

That has got to be the most stupid argument for ‘anytime’ abortion I have read.

(01-24-2019 01:47 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

That has got to be the most stupid argument for ‘anytime’ abortion I have read.

And I'm guessing you don't have the slightest idea what my stance on abortion even is, do you?

(01-24-2019 01:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

That is because it is probably illegal in most states to have an abortion after 8 months. Abortion bans do stop abortions because if the Docs, who otherwise are law abiding people, get busted they will be prosecuted.

(01-24-2019 01:53 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:47 PM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

That has got to be the most stupid argument for ‘anytime’ abortion I have read.

And I'm guessing you don't have the slightest idea what my stance on abortion even is, do you?

I have no idea. I do know making something legal simply because it happens is asinine.

(01-24-2019 01:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

It doesn't surprise me in the least that you are OK with the NY law. Even though it is uncommon, it is now OK. Your due date is on Saturday? You can kill your baby on Friday. Common? No. Legal? Yes.

There is a problem with that.

(01-24-2019 01:17 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 12:54 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  There is so much misinformation and inflammatory articles going around regarding this it’s unreal.

The reality is that "late term abortions" are NOT what the mother wants to happen. 99% of elective abortions are prior to 24 weeks. No one is "celebrating" that a healthy woman with a healthy pregnancy, who randomly wakes up at 40 weeks, goes to the hospital for delivery but instead decides to terminate her pregnancy.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017...veCJD3D0gk

Doctors have their own oath they must uphold and the bulk of the bill simply moves legislation that addresses abortion from the criminal code to the health and safety code, where it belongs. The paragraph of the bill that has been grossly misrepresented clearly states that anything beyond 24 weeks must be because either the fetus died or the woman’s life or health are at risk. It also states the doctor must use good faith and professional judgment based on the facts of a particular case, as we hope they always would, according to their oath.

Abortion is a medical procedure. The more restrictive laws in some states include non-viable fetuses who cannot survive outside of the womb, because they are missing lungs, or the head did not develop. In those states - where everyone knows the fetus is not viable, women who thought they would be mothers are required to carry to term. This also includes instances where the fetus has died, and women are not permitted to have an "abortion" to remove the fetus where a miscarriage has not naturally happened.

When women reside in those states that restrict "abortion" to include the actual medical procedure instead of specific circumstances regarding viable pregnancies, those women either just have to wait (usually creating a situation that endangers their health, where one did not exist), or travel somewhere so that they can get the medical treatment (usually prescriptions or a shot) to induce the abortion. Any way you look at it, it's a horrible situation for these women to be put in.

Just within my own circle, there is a woman (in TN) who found out the fetus had died at 8 months (no heartbeat or other activity) in utero. Because they were past a certain week in the pregnancy, could not get an elective abortion in TN and had to wait, carrying around a dead fetus inside them, hoping their bodies would spontaneously abort. I cannot imagine the horror, trauma, and sadness they experienced, and would not wish it upon anyone.

The "celebration" is that women do not have to suffer like that in the state of NY.

New York already allowed abortions after 24 weeks to protect the mother. Also, this law allows mid-wives and physician assistants to perform some abortions. So it can only be assumed if someone murders a pregnant woman the murderer will no longer be charged with multiple counts.

Not sure what someone murdering the mother has to do with the discussion...

Midwives, PA's, etc., are still licensed professionals. If, God forbid, a woman has to do this late-term and she wants to be at home instead of at a hospital, she should be able to do so.

And NY did NOT allow them post 24 weeks until after Tuesday. Up until then, the law required a mother to carry a non viable fetus full term. Meaning if a mother's baby died after 24 weeks, she could not have the abortion procedure without committing a felony.

Abortion was considered a felony prior to Tuesday - hence the change from the criminal code to the health & safety code.

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/sto...643065002/

New York legalized abortion three years prior to the landmark Roe v. Wade case, but New York still kept abortion in its criminal code, making it a felony to perform late-term abortions.

The 1970 law defined homicide as "conduct which causes the death of a person or an unborn child with which a female has been pregnant for more than 24 weeks."

The new law will allow a licensed "health-care practitioner" acting under their scope of practice to perform an abortion when:

"According to the practitioner's reasonable and good faith professional judgment based on the facts of the patient's case: the patient is within twenty-four weeks from the commencement of pregnancy, or there is an absence of fetal viability, or the abortion is necessary to protect the patient's life or health."

So the measure will make late-term abortions legal at the discretion of a health-care practitioner based on the viability of the fetus or if the woman's life or health is in jeopardy.

And the act will codify Roe v. Wade protections into state law if the case were to be overturned by the Supreme Court, which Cuomo cited as the main reason for needing the new state law.

(01-24-2019 01:40 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

Because it hardly ever happens! So the "outrage" being expressed here is really not warranted. Nearly all abortions in these instances are made on the advice of doctors and are related to the health of the baby and the mother.

The death penalty does not stop murders, abortion bans won't stop abortions.

Totally missing the point. It's not that it hardly every happens it's that it will be allowed to happen that one time. That's the travesty. Murder isn't allowed to happen.

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

...agreed, but this new law doesn't change any of that. The law is to protect women who have a medical need to have the procedure done because the baby is already dead in utero, or will be damaging the mother's health by continuing.

Surely we can all agree that it's also a travesty to have to carry around your dead baby if you can't afford to travel to another state just so you don't get charged with a felony?

(01-24-2019 03:48 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

...agreed, but this new law doesn't change any of that. The law is to protect women who have a medical need to have the procedure done because the baby is already dead in utero, or will be damaging the mother's health by continuing.

Surely we can all agree that it's also a travesty to have to carry around your dead baby if you can't afford to travel to another state just so you don't get charged with a felony?

Still borns happen frequently and have nothing to do with abortions.

(01-24-2019 03:48 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 01:10 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 11:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Curious, how many pregnant women who carry a baby for 8+ months just decide at the last moment, "Ya know...I no longer want this baby, so I'll just abort it for no other reason than that."

Why does that even matter? If only one does such a thing it's a travesty.

...agreed, but this new law doesn't change any of that. The law is to protect women who have a medical need to have the procedure done because the baby is already dead in utero, or will be damaging the mother's health by continuing.

Surely we can all agree that it's also a travesty to have to carry around your dead baby if you can't afford to travel to another state just so you don't get charged with a felony?

why does one need a specific law to define the obvious unless it revolves around the tort???

eliminating the tort becomes reasonable...

if the mother is in danger, I'm certain that's already covered within existing statute....

but fk it....just let NY do their thingy.....

#dadumdemsrule

(01-24-2019 12:54 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  Doctors have their own oath they must uphold and the bulk of the bill simply moves legislation that addresses abortion from the criminal code to the health and safety code, where it belongs. The paragraph of the bill that has been grossly misrepresented clearly states that anything beyond 24 weeks must be because either the fetus died or the woman’s life or health are at risk. It also states the doctor must use good faith and professional judgment based on the facts of a particular case, as we hope they always would, according to their oath.

Abortion is a medical procedure. The more restrictive laws in some states include non-viable fetuses who cannot survive outside of the womb, because they are missing lungs, or the head did not develop. In those states - where everyone knows the fetus is not viable, women who thought they would be mothers are required to carry to term. This also includes instances where the fetus has died, and women are not permitted to have an "abortion" to remove the fetus where a miscarriage has not naturally happened.

When women reside in those states that restrict "abortion" to include the actual medical procedure instead of specific circumstances regarding viable pregnancies, those women either just have to wait (usually creating a situation that endangers their health, where one did not exist), or travel somewhere so that they can get the medical treatment (usually prescriptions or a shot) to induce the abortion. Any way you look at it, it's a horrible situation for these women to be put in.

Just within my own circle, there is a woman (in TN) who found out the fetus had died at 8 months (no heartbeat or other activity) in utero. Because they were past a certain week in the pregnancy, could not get an elective abortion in TN and had to wait, carrying around a dead fetus inside them, hoping their bodies would spontaneously abort. I cannot imagine the horror, trauma, and sadness they experienced, and would not wish it upon anyone.

The "celebration" is that women do not have to suffer like that in the state of NY.

2 Things

1. Kermit Gosnell took an oath as a doctor and he was a murdering criminal. Just because someone is a doctor does not mean they are infallible. This law now provides legal cover for a corrupt doctor to profit off deeming any abortion "medically necessary." Like Gosnell, word will spread about the doctor being the place to go if you need an abortion no one else will approve

2. I can not imagine the trauma your friend must have suffered. If the baby has died before birth, I do not think remove him/her from the womb would be considered an abortion. If the legal code did state that, why couldn't that narrow change have been made using different terminology?

(01-24-2019 03:48 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  ...agreed, but this new law doesn't change any of that. The law is to protect women who have a medical need to have the procedure done because the baby is already dead in utero, or will be damaging the mother's health by continuing.

WHaa... Where did we get this claim from?

Nothing I've seen in the review of this law even implicates that this is what it's for!

(01-24-2019 04:02 PM)solohawks Wrote:  

(01-24-2019 12:54 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  Doctors have their own oath they must uphold and the bulk of the bill simply moves legislation that addresses abortion from the criminal code to the health and safety code, where it belongs. The paragraph of the bill that has been grossly misrepresented clearly states that anything beyond 24 weeks must be because either the fetus died or the woman’s life or health are at risk. It also states the doctor must use good faith and professional judgment based on the facts of a particular case, as we hope they always would, according to their oath.

Abortion is a medical procedure. The more restrictive laws in some states include non-viable fetuses who cannot survive outside of the womb, because they are missing lungs, or the head did not develop. In those states - where everyone knows the fetus is not viable, women who thought they would be mothers are required to carry to term. This also includes instances where the fetus has died, and women are not permitted to have an "abortion" to remove the fetus where a miscarriage has not naturally happened.

When women reside in those states that restrict "abortion" to include the actual medical procedure instead of specific circumstances regarding viable pregnancies, those women either just have to wait (usually creating a situation that endangers their health, where one did not exist), or travel somewhere so that they can get the medical treatment (usually prescriptions or a shot) to induce the abortion. Any way you look at it, it's a horrible situation for these women to be put in.

Just within my own circle, there is a woman (in TN) who found out the fetus had died at 8 months (no heartbeat or other activity) in utero. Because they were past a certain week in the pregnancy, could not get an elective abortion in TN and had to wait, carrying around a dead fetus inside them, hoping their bodies would spontaneously abort. I cannot imagine the horror, trauma, and sadness they experienced, and would not wish it upon anyone.

The "celebration" is that women do not have to suffer like that in the state of NY.

2 Things

1. Kermit Gosnell took an oath as a doctor and he was a murdering criminal. Just because someone is a doctor does not mean they are infallible. This law now provides legal cover for a corrupt doctor to profit off deeming any abortion "medically necessary." Like Gosnell, word will spread about the doctor being the place to go if you need an abortion no one else will approve

2. I can not imagine the trauma your friend must have suffered. If the baby has died before birth, I do not think remove him/her from the womb would be considered an abortion. If the legal code did state that, why couldn't that narrow change have been made using different terminology?

Wait, does anyone actually consider that abortion?