Women seeking abortions must view an ultrasound

E

emkay64

New member
Putting aside the abortion issue...do you believe this is a violation of rights? Should someone undergoing a heart transplant have to watch home videos of the person whose heart they are receiving? I mean technically the medical ethics are the same. It's someone saying that what you are doing is wrong and you should be punished. I just wonder if people can subtract the inflammatory abortion issue and see where this could lead if it's allowed.

Also..it says even forcing them to undergo a vaginal ultrasound for a better view...my ***. In the hands of a vengeful tech intent on making a point..this is nothing more than government sanctioned rape in my opinion. It's also an incredible waste of tax dollars.

 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
hugo

hugo

New member
Yep, it is a violation of rights. It is like having to watch a video of a baby seal clubbed to death before buying that sealskin coat or having to watch a chicken slaughtered at the KFC before ordering.

From my experience most people should have never been born.

 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
ImWithStupid

ImWithStupid

New member
I think making a law, forcing people to do something they don't want to do, to guilt people out of doing something that you can't make illegal, is despicable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
ToriAllen

ToriAllen

New member
I think it is part of making a fully informed decision. It isn't about where the heart came from or where the baby came from. They aren't showing video of people having ***. They do, however, usually show patients x-rays and explain what is going to be done during the procedure as will as possible problems. It is no different with abortion. If the woman truely feels there is nothing wrong with what she is doing then there would be no problem with seeing the ultrasound and knowing exactly what she is doing. No wrong, no guilt. So where is the problem?
 
timesjoke

timesjoke

Active Members
I think it is part of making a fully informed decision. It isn't about where the heart came from or where the baby came from. They aren't showing video of people having ***. They do, however, usually show patients x-rays and explain what is going to be done during the procedure as will as possible problems. It is no different with abortion. If the woman truely feels there is nothing wrong with what she is doing then there would be no problem with seeing the ultrasound and knowing exactly what she is doing. No wrong, no guilt. So where is the problem?
Click to expand...
Excellent point.

The arguement against it seems to be that people don't want women to face the full truth of their actions.

Invasion of privacy? I don't see this, everything is still kept between the woman and her doctors, all they are saying is if your going to end that life, at least be completely informed and aware of exactly what you are doing. The ending of a life should be something we take seriously.

As far as fathers are concerned, I agree that they should also see the ultrasound if they want the woman to get the abortion but this could also be very cruel for the men. What if the father becomes more attached to his child once he has seen it but the mother still wants to kill the baby? Didn't you just increase the man's pain? Seems a little cruel to me.

 
ImWithStupid

ImWithStupid

New member
I think it is part of making a fully informed decision. It isn't about where the heart came from or where the baby came from. They aren't showing video of people having ***. They do, however, usually show patients x-rays and explain what is going to be done during the procedure as will as possible problems. It is no different with abortion. If the woman truely feels there is nothing wrong with what she is doing then there would be no problem with seeing the ultrasound and knowing exactly what she is doing. No wrong, no guilt. So where is the problem?
Click to expand...


In your other examples, there isn't a law forcing someone to see an x-ray before having a procedure. If explaining the procedure for an informed decision, what's wrong with using a model, an animation, etc...

The only reason to force someone to view their own child's 3-D ultrasound is to guilt someone out of going through with the abortion.

 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
timesjoke

timesjoke

Active Members
The only reason to force someone to view their own child's 3-D ultrasound is to guilt someone out of going through with the abortion.
Click to expand...
The very concept of laws are written morals Joe.

Murder for example is illegal because society as a whole believe is morally wrong. Every study and poll ever conducted about abortion has the majority of people all saying that abortion should be more restricted and not just seen as a regular birth control method. At the same time most people agree that things like rape and incest should be treated as different than irresponsibility based abortions.

So, society has spoken and says they want people to take more responsibility for their decision to kill a child, I see no problem with that myself.

As far as your guilt comment is concerned, you missed the point Tori made:

If the woman truely feels there is nothing wrong with what she is doing then there would be no problem with seeing the ultrasound and knowing exactly what she is doing. No wrong, no guilt. So where is the problem?
Click to expand...

They can't feel guilt if they believe they are not doing anything wrong Joe.

If just seeing their baby inside them suddenly changes their mind then they were not killing the baby with the right mindset in the first place.

 
ToriAllen

ToriAllen

New member
In your other examples, there isn't a law forcing someone to see an x-ray before having a procedure. If explaining the procedure for an informed decision, what's wrong with using a model, an animation, etc...

The only reason to force someone to view their own child's 3-D ultrasound is to guilt someone out of going through with the abortion.
Click to expand...
I disagree. I'm pretty sure a doctor who performs heart surgery without some kind of x-ray is liable for mal-practice. I know I would be very wary of them.

I do not agree with lectures or guilting, but I have always been annoyed with the ‘special’ treatment abortion is given because of the touchy nature of the procedure. Patients are fully informed when going for any other procedure, why treat this one differently. I think doctors should lay out the facts, risks, and possible effects, the same way they do for any other procedure. Stop dancing around the issue. If the girl has no problem with it, then full disclosure isn’t an issue. If the girl has a problem with it, that should probably be worked out in her head ahead of time anyway so it doesn’t effect her on down the road.

Again, I don’t believe in lecturing about moral choices, but I see nothing wrong with forcing people to stop p-ssy-footing around the issue.

 
ImWithStupid

ImWithStupid

New member
I disagree. I'm pretty sure a doctor who performs heart surgery without some kind of x-ray is liable for mal-practice. I know I would be very wary of them.

I do not agree with lectures or guilting, but I have always been annoyed with the ‘special’ treatment abortion is given because of the touchy nature of the procedure. Patients are fully informed when going for any other procedure, why treat this one differently. I think doctors should lay out the facts, risks, and possible effects, the same way they do for any other procedure. Stop dancing around the issue. If the girl has no problem with it, then full disclosure isn’t an issue. If the girl has a problem with it, that should probably be worked out in her head ahead of time anyway so it doesn’t effect her on down the road.

Again, I don’t believe in lecturing about moral choices, but I see nothing wrong with forcing people to stop p-ssy-footing around the issue.
Click to expand...

The difference here is that in all your situations, Dr's are informing the patients for just the fact that it's right or for liability reasons. Nobody is forcing them to do this but the government is forcing someone to look at an ultrasound before being able to have a medical procedure. It's government intervention in health care at the least, and at worst forcing someone else's beliefs and values on a patient before they can have a procedure.

If I have a bad heart and the Dr pulls out x-rays or has an ultrasound of the heart, I can choose not to look at those, but this forces the patient to do something they may or may not want to do, and isn't necessary for the procedure to be done.

Gov't nannyism is wrong whether it be from the left or the right.

 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
hugo

hugo

New member
You should not be forced to be "fully informed". I don't have to watch a video of that chicken being slaughtered before I eat at KFC. I know full well a chicken died for my tasty meal.

If someone does not feel it is truly wrong to eat fried chicken they should not mind watching a video of chickens slaughtered.

 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
W

wez

New member
IWS and Hugo are exactly right.. Tori, your comparisons are ****.. A person is not forced to view an X ray or forced to receive any information about a procedure against their will.. They are provided that info to decrease anxiety about a surgery/procedure etc.. Sure.. a doc would be in trouble for withholding info.. but it's all the choice of the patient what info they want. If the doc says "do you want to see the x ray" and the patient said no.. case closed.. if he then said.. well.. "we wont do your surgery until you look".. he'd be in for a lawsuit.. Patients are fully informed to the extent they WANT to be informed.. they are never forced..

Like I said.. info is provided to decrease anxiety about a procedure and is never forced on someone.. Decreasing anxiety is a medical necessity and the ethical thing to do.. a woman seeking an abortion forced to view an ultrasound is to increase her anxiety and instill guilt to discourage her from having the procedure all together.. not a medical necessity to perform an ultrasound before an abortion.. matter of fact it goes against everything I was taught as a nurse. Every nurse has a legal obligation to advocate for the well being of their patient and doing **** that is medically unnecessary to increase someones anxiety to impose moral judgments upon them is malpractice and totally unethical.. it is the polar opposite of your examples.

So.. "ma'am.. would you like us to do an ultrasound and see your fetus before we terminate your pregnancy?" .. No.. Case closed..

Patients have the right to decline any and all procedures.. meds.. etc.. The right to decline any treatment. Be hard pressed to make a case saying an ultrasound is medically necessary to perform an abortion.

 
hugo

hugo

New member
The same kind of people that support this also love requiring that we all have our IDs on us at all times or be subject to arrest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wez
W

wez

New member
The same kind of people that support this also love requiring that we all have our IDs on us at all times or be subject to arrest.
Click to expand...
Also the same kind of people who are against eating meat who would love to force everyone eating at KFC to watch vids of chickens being pumped with steroids and slaughtered before you can eat it.

Vids of cows being shot in the head and butchered in isle 2.. bring your official verification of viewing to the meat counter if you still want that steak you immoral *******!

You belong to PETA Tori? Even if ya don't.. you must agree they have the right to forcibly inform you of your decision.. no wrong no guilt then no problem eh?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom