(07-18-2022 01:20 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-18-2022 12:59 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(07-18-2022 11:01 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  Looks like we are having some trouble navigating this issue in Texas... not just doctors but hospital administrators as well.

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas...307401.php

Horse ****

All this means is that some clinics and some doctors in some hospital settings are not authorized to perform ectopic abortions... because (in no small part) of precisely what i said before... that if it is 'life threatening' then they want it performed in a place that could save that threatened life... in order to be clear about the procedure. You USED to be able to do this in a less 'safe' setting. This is a good thing because people can die.. that's why they're allowed... but is being used as a red flag to people who are generally against the laws.

Curious where you are getting this from.

I looked for a copy of the letter but I didn't find it, did you?

This is from the article in the Dallas paper:

Quote:One in Central Texas allegedly told a physician not to treat an ectopic pregnancy until it ruptured, which puts patient health at serious risk, according to the letter. An ectopic pregnancy, when a fertilized egg attaches outside of the uterus, is not viable.

“Delayed or prevented care in this scenario creates a substantial risk for the patient’s future reproductive ability and poses serious risk to the patient’s immediate physical wellbeing,” the letter said.

Two other hospitals may be directing doctors to send pregnant patients home to “expel the fetus” when their water breaks too early, instead of treating them at the hospital, the letter said.

In those situations, physicians have said that patients are at risk of infection.

The alleged interference not only puts patients at risk of serious injury, the letter said, but also could expose doctors to lawsuits or threaten their medical licenses. It may violate Texas’ prohibition on the corporate practice of medicine, which the board has the power to enforce, the letter said.

Where are you getting that this is about performing abortions in hospitals versus outpatient facilities? I am not reading this based on what I've found.

I am not reading the letter, which is fashioned by an advocacy group against the law. They aren't going to tell the truth about what is happening. Here is the best example... from your letter:

Two other hospitals may be directing doctors to send pregnant patients home to “expel the fetus” when their water breaks too early, instead of treating them at the hospital, the letter said.

well, either they are or aren't... 'May be' is a projection, not an accusation. They also may be worshiping Satan while they do this!! The 'alleged' also gives me pause... Again, either they said it or they didn't. Why would it be 'alleged' if they are reporting a legal/compliance issue to a regulatory board? That makes no sense. Does it really to you? Sounds more to me like they're speculating and projecting what they think COULD happen, but in a way that implies that it already is.


Let me start with this...

As I said and demonstrated before, treatment for what I recall is a 'type 2' ectopic pregnancy is NOT an abortion under the medical code... thus would not be an abortion under the law, despite the similar outcomes... because the fetus is NEVER viable and the risk to the mother is all but absolute. No abortion is ever performed. Period.

For type 1, the health of the mother and the viability of that child 'depends' and it should be monitored.

and finally, the odds that you'd have a type 2 ectopic pregnancy with a heart beat is pretty low.... since you're talking about a baby small enough to still be in the fallopian tubes that hasn't yet burst or caused the mom to seek medical care previously, but with a discernable heartbeat.

Let me put the discovery of an ectopic pregnancy once again in context.... and how a Hospital Administrator/risk administrator might respond to it...

A patient comes in to an OBs office with no complications, and an ectopic pregnancy... the woman's life is not at imminent risk. The doctor determines type 1 or type 2. If type 2, you schedule the procedure... you don't schedule an abortion... and you do it in 'certain' settings. I don't know what those settings might be, but there are certainly requirements for those settings. If type 1, you monitor the situation to see if it becomes type 2 (in which case you follow the above) or if it resolves (falls into the uteris or aborts naturally) then you address those issues. You are not allowed to simply abort the baby (assuming the discovery takes place beyond 2+ months) if there is no immediate threat to the mother and the issues may resolve on their own.

ONLY if you are at risk of an imminent, like so imminent that you can't get them to an ER, burst of the fallopian tubes are you authorized to perform that abortion in a 'non-emergency' setting. This protects the hospital AND the doctor because the ER doc makes these decisions all day long and has no previous contact with the mother to bring their decision making into question. The 'trauma surgeon' we previously discussed certainly knows what 'life threatening' means. So does an ER doc.

That makes perfect sense to me, and could EASILY be spun as your letter did to 'telling an OB that they have to wait until it bursts to do anything'

You see, 93... if you are in a hospital on the floor and you code... your PCP, even if they are right there... don't manage the code. The crash team does. Certainly (s)he can help, but THEY run the code.... and will push them out of the way if they must. This is the same thing. An OB doc wouldn't be doing this in anything but the rare instance where a woman comes in to an office with an undiagnosed ectopic pregnancy beyond 2+ months about to burst, and no time to get them to the ER.

And you don't have to trust me... ask them... With or without the risk of punishment, they don't want to be in that situation.