Pretty much, but at least in a free market, the bad one will be punished. In a highly regulated market, the bad ones just keep on being bad:
That doesn't address the point. If consumers valued licensing and regulation, then illegal contractors wouldn't have any customers. Yet we observe they have plenty.
Milton Friedman studied occupational licensing intensely, and he never found a single instance where licensure was demanded by the public. In every single case, it was the industry itself that demanded licensing in order to make lower cost competition illegal.
Risk of harm is a medical determination by a doctor. Choosing to consent to interventions to reduce or eliminate risks is for the woman to decide for herself. Abortion restrictions in effect eliminates that choice and forces the woman to endure (increasing) risk associated with gestation and birth.That's for her to decide, not you, and certainly not the state.
I agree, but there is no reason for the state to control the hospital.
I was reading this article, and something caught my eye:
What The History Of Back-Alley Abortions Can Teach Us About A Future Without Roe
UPDATE (June 24, 2022, 12:33 p.m.): On Friday, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which established the constitutional right to abortion in 1973, with fi…fivethirtyeight.com
This is yet another example of the market doing the best it can to provide a needed service against the will of a hostile, immoral, democratic state.
Of course there were people who performed abortions who had no idea what they were doing, just like some people made poor quality bathtub gin during alcohol prohibition. Both of these were caused by the state prohibition, because in a free market, if you performed just one bad abortion, your reputation would be destroyed, and your career as an abortionist would be over. Same with booze.
Pretty much, but at least in a free market, the bad one will be punished. In a highly regulated market, the bad ones just keep on being bad:
Agreed, and both of them came out of the progressive movement.
Regulations are written by lobbyists in order to restrict entry into the field which in turn means higher prices and higher profits for those being regulated.
Yes, because state control of doctors allows politicians to restrict abortions, thus harming women.
In the heart of the progressive movement, abortion was illegal in every state in the country.
No. I'm arguing that an unregulated free market will provide better quality and lower prices than a government regulated market which restricts competition and often protects bad actors.
I'm pro-choice on everything.
There aren't even requirements for reporting the total number of abortions. The most widely quoted estimate is from the pro abortion Guttmacher Institute.How will the "bad ones" be punished for accidentally sterilizing a woman or nearly killing her, who was receiving an illegal procedure and cannot go to the police (or the ER)? How will the bad ones be punished when the woman tells no one she's getting an illegal procedure and then dies at home?
Explain how the Guttmacher Institute is "pro-abortion."There aren't even requirements for reporting the total number of abortions. The most widely quoted estimate is from the pro abortion Guttmacher Institute
Not seeing the issue here.In Minnesota the provider can be anyone certified to slaughter the unborn. No MD license is required. But why worry when there is no visibility of malpractice.
There shouldn't be any such laws either. Why should anyone face legal repercussions for removing a gestational parasite feeding off their body against their consent?I am unable to find examples of US laws that punish patients for illegal abortions. Punishment is specified for providers. I can't locate any legal ban on ER care or a specific abortion reporting requirement.
There aren't even requirements for reporting the total number of abortions. The most widely quoted estimate is from the pro abortion Guttmacher Institute.
In Minnesota the provider can be anyone certified to slaughter the unborn. No MD license is required. But why worry when there is no visibility of malpractice.
I am unable to find examples of US laws that punish patients for illegal abortions. Punishment is specified for providers. I can't locate any legal ban on ER care or a specific abortion reporting requirement.
I doubt it. It sounds more like an irrational complaint. One can tell as soon as the term "pro abortion" is tossed around.Do you have a point?
Read the about section on their website.Explain how the Guttmacher Institute is "pro-abortion."
The claim is victims of botched illegal abortions aren't seeking medical or repoting to law enforcement out of fear.Not seeing the issue here.
Gestational parasite for an unborn child perfectly encapsulates the absence of any respect for human lifeThere shouldn't be any such laws either. Why should anyone face legal repercussions for removing a gestational parasite feeding off their body against their consent?
What about it? Where does it say they are "pro abortion?" Guttmacher provides citations, information, and education.Read the about section on their website.
Certain states want to criminalize women who have abortions. But the issue is, medical providers are in fear of providing any service which can result in or be construed as an abortion attempt or procedure. Women are therefore becoming desperate and seeking back alley abortions.The claim is victims of botched illegal abortions aren't seeking medical or repoting to law enforcement out of fear.
Spare me the emotionalism. It won't work on me.Gestational parasite for an unborn child perfectly encapsulates the absence of any respect for human life
So, there is no impartial reporting of the total number of abortions. There is no reporting of botched abortions. No way to identify incompetent providers. Abortion is still legal but it's still in the backroom.Yes, so?
The hyperbole was that women who have been injured in illegal abortions are too afraid to seek medical help or contact law enforcement so abortion restrictions cost lives. It's a claim completely disconnected from the law.I guess you havent read the laws in the red states that have the restrictions/bans then. It's very clear they target providers. If you perform an abortion on another, you are providing that service. None of them state anything about credentials.
Only that the hyperbole around abortion guard rails costing women's lives isn't based on facts.Do you have a point?
So, there is no impartial reporting of the total number of abortions. There is no reporting of botched abortions. No way to identify incompetent providers. Abortion is still legal but it's still in the backroom.
The hyperbole was that women who have been injured in illegal abortions are too afraid to seek medical help or contact law enforcement so abortion restrictions cost lives. It's a claim completely disconnected from the law.
Only that the hyperbole around abortion guard rails costing women's lives isn't based on facts.
Prove a negative for your unsupported claim. No you show stste abortion statistics.The states dont do so? Please cite that.
Cite US abortion regulations that punish the patient. None of my research shows any.How so? They would face legal penalties, right? So why wouldnt they be afraid and more likely to take the risks?
You have made the claim that abortion guard rails cost lives but offer no credible evidence only conjecture. You have displayed ignorance of the relavant statistics and laws. Brilliant. Do you even have a point?You have provided zero facts to prove that.
Prove a negative for your unsupported claim. No you show stste abortion statistics.
Cite US abortion regulations that punish the patient. None of my research shows any.
You have made the claim that abortion guard rails cost lives but offer no credible evidence only conjecture. You have displayed ignorance of the relavant statistics and laws. Brilliant. Do you even have a point?
You presented abortion statistics from 1 state . The next 2 are from Kaiser Family. The last is from Lozier. 3 out of 4 are estimates. The challenge was to provide reliable national figures from health department reporting.
You claimed Red states had regulations punishing abortion patients.There are no US regulations for that. It's not a federal issue any longer.
No reliable statistics to support your claim of abortion safety or visibility of bad providers. No support for your claim red states have laws punishing the abortion patient. Instead you are thrashing around trying to change the subject.I havent been making that argument here. I've been showing that the new focus on ALL these incidents related to pregnancy/childbirth, whether relate to abortion or not, show that the anti-abortite mantra about pregnancy/childbirth being safe is bullshit in general. Now, because of national interest in abortion, we're seeing more reporting on the actual risks and costs of pregnancy/childbirth.
To support my position that it's immoral for anti-abortites to demand women be denied the much safer medical procedure of abortion.
You presented abortion statistics from 1 state . The next 2 are from Kaiser Family. The last is from Lozier. 3 out of 4 are estimates. The challenge was to provide reliable national figures from health department reporting.
You claimed Red states had regulations punishing abortion patients.
No reliable statistics to support your claim of abortion safety or visibility of bad providers. No support for your claim red states have laws punishing the abortion patient. Instead you are thrashing around trying to change the subject.
It will provide better quality *for the rich* and lower prices along with lower quality for everyone else.
But then again, you think poor people who can’t afford doctors should pay their untrained relatives to perform surgery on them.
When America had its smallest government and greatest amount of capitalism, slavery was legal in every state in the country. So therefore capitalism is pro-slavery, yes?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?