(06-30-2022 04:30 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

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

Nice shove to an immaterial side there 93. My comment is directed to the prohibition and the standard in the 2013 law.

They should have taken note of it, at the very least. Perhaps even tried to operate under those standards.

Based on your oodles and boodles of 'they are worried' and assorted teeth gnashing, seemingly they havent. It has nothing to do with your emotive blast of the hard work about delivering babies and bad news. I dont disagree with that.

Doesnt detract that they should be aware of the standard to follow since 2013. No matter how deep your paean to the hard work you give.

Or, given your defense above (albeit as off point as it is), is it your position that they had no reason to be aware of a standard set in law 9 years ago, and they only should be concerned with the law from 9 years ago today when enforcement is possible?

Quote:

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.

So they are already all following the law. Great, Then what is the big hooplpa that you keep hitting on? The law lays in a standard, has done so since 2013.

Your comment about about how ALL these doctors (Im not even going to get into the slam dunk over your assertion of 'ALL' mind you) are "already following the law, BTW" stands at huge odds to your previous statement about all the teeth gnashing over the 'new law framework' -- since the major exception in there is already IN the law. There should be no worries.

If the 'teeth gnashing' over the 'new law framework' (which as we know is really the old law framework, but '20 weeks' is replaced with 'no freebie period'), then the only thing different is instead of seeing a portion of the abortion business you used to see require an adherence to a standard, all of your abortion business must meet that same exception.

The only major impact will be on the providers that explicitly turned away from from their care if they were more than 20 weeks pregnant. That is, because the exception that used to be an exception in some cases now turns to be the exception for all cases.

Then only major "new" thing about the law on abortion is that it will seemingly have an enforcement aspect to it. Which I assume is apparently poison to practitioners even though the same standard was already part of the law.

So --

one law with a standard and no enforcement is hot dog okay with practitioners then and now.
a succeeding law with the same standard and enforcement is intolerable for many practitioners.

Kind of pithy but seemingly tells a lot.