(06-30-2022 04:45 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(06-30-2022 04:30 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(06-30-2022 03:56 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(06-30-2022 03:31 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(06-30-2022 03:21 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  To be honest, if I had been a professional with a 'ban' in place with no enforcement in place I'd be in a pretty happy place. Now that I see that that Texas was a *zero* recourse state to an illegal abortion, I guess when the school bell rings and the real world starts without 'all day lunch and recess', I'd be concerned as well.

Well yeah, Tanq.... but let's be clear here....

You're talking about somebody willfully seeking to break the law... and not somebody who is afraid that they might make a mistake or be second-guessed.

Right?

THAT is the scenario being portrayed here... that someone delays an actual emergency because they're afriad of being second-guessed, and NOT that someone is actually seeking to perform an illegal abortion and they previously didn't get punished criminally for doing so.

Previously, you could perform an abortion in Texas up till birth. There would be a 'violation' of the statue -- but no enforcement mechanism.

This actually made an illegal abortion a no-lose issue in Texas. Intentional or not.

Kind of like saying 'Robbing a bank of more than 25k is prohibited." And not specifying what level of a crime it is, let alone civil infraction, makes it cost-free. Great, there is a prohibition. A statute that states there is a 'prohibition' with no means to enforce is a non- prohibition.

Now, there is enforcement. Physicians actually have to look at the prohibitions since there is a cost. No more insta- get out of jail card since there is no penalty at all like before.

Now, had Texas actually spelled out a penalty -- even a licensure loss -- I will bet you dollars to donuts you wouldnt see the stink from 93 and buds. My response is bummer. That was already on the books, and the physicians seemingly blew it off since there was no prospect of penalty.

Recess is over.

Groan.

Quote:And yes, bummer. Physicians need to understand and appreciate the terms 'intentionally" and "recklessly". They should have done that since 2013 with the prohibition -- even without penalty. Now they have to grow up and put their big boy pants on. Pretty fast. Like most of the nation already did.

This is seemingly turning into an issue of who is more at fault -- the 'idiot parent' state who spelled out a prohibition with no consequence, or the spoiled as **** kids who now realize they should have actually taken note of the prohibition and its language.

Oh yeah... these obstetricians have just been so spoiled performing emergent abortions when they felt that the woman's life was at risk. It's just such a blast letting these families know that these pregnancies had to be terminated and their babies were lost. Full-on party times, Tanq.

Quote:What I am saying is I now understand the consternation of abortion providers. Up until now there was a 'no cost at all to violate' stricture. I understand their 'what are we going to do' thing. But, I have zero fing sympathy for it. Prohibition was in place, along with the exception language. Other jurisdictions actually enforced it. Now, they are forced to do what pretty much everyone else has done. because they probably blew off a toothless prohibition. As I said, time to put their big boy pants on like the rest of the states. Bummer.

Tanq, I'm not even referring to the relatively miniscule # of doctors that perform elective abortions in Texas. I'm talking about the many, many, many Texas doctors (Obstetricians, family practice doctors) that practice general obstetrics. You know.... those doctors that deliver all of our kids, grandkids, great-grandkids. They may perform abortions on those rare occasions when they feel that the woman's life is at risk.

THOSE are really the doctors that are voicing concerns about these new penalties. They aren't looking to do elective abortions, or looking to do MORE abortions in general... they are worried about their liability when it comes to those emergent cases where they determine an abortion is necessary.

I mean... crow all you want about how doctors now actually have to follow the law (these doctors were all already following the law, BTW)... but this is going to have a chilling affect on the number of these doctors who are going to continue to deliver babies. In some rural areas that is going to be a big problem.

And this is why I asked for such a direct response, Tanq...

93, respectfully, you have NO IDEA who these doctors are that are voicing concerns (for themselves)... or what they know, or their motivations. None of them are going to TELL you that they're looking to perform illegal abortions or are just trying to push back on the religious right, even if they 100% are.

But you are 100% right. These doctors are already following the law... so if all we do is change the date and add some penalties for violating the law, why all the consternation?

If they were following the law before, why would it be more of a problem in rural areas in 2023 than in 2021? If it was illegal in 2021 and they managed to navigate it, why would they be so concerned in 2023?

I'm sorry, but the most obvious answer is that they're only really 'worried' because they don't like the law... which is a valid reason... just not the one that 'pushes back' on a law... and not because they don't know how to follow it or are concerned about what happens if they make a mistake.

As I said, claiming that these new confusing laws will cause life threatening delays is just a false flag trying to appeal to those like me who don't really have a dog in the 'should it be fetal heartbeat or 12 or 16 or 20 or 24 weeks'. Unfortunately for them, SOME people like me don't think doctors can't determine what constitutes a life saving required abortion.

In short, if they are following the 2013 law, they already know the exception. And they shouldnt be concerned with criminal violations.

If they blew it off because it had no enforcement mechanism, well they didnt do their homework.

There is nothing 'new' in the abortion arena since 2013. The only 'new' thing is that the standard will actually have teeth.

The trigger law that is expected to kick in has the exception which closely tracks that of the 2013 law.

unless the mother "has a life-threatening physical condition aggravated by, caused by, or arising from a pregnancy that places the female at risk of death or poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced"

There is not much *new* to the law that will kick in relative to the 2013 law's exceptions, regardless of your emotive thrashing to the contrary.