- Joined
- Apr 25, 2010
- Messages
- 80,422
- Reaction score
- 29,077
- Location
- Pittsburgh
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
1.)That's an impressive list of organizations endorsing that change. I'm not at all sure how the FDA would enter into this, though. (Not that they should, I just don't know.)
2.)While I read that it's one of the safest abortion procedures, we all know that complications can throw any procedure into a cocked hat.
3.)I guess, in the scheme of things, this is just one more incursion into the power and mystic of medical doctors. *shrug* I don't have to stretch too far to think that may be a good thing.
4.)Thanks for the education.
"Gov. Jerry Brown of California signed AB 154 on Wednesday, legalizing non-physician abortions in the state.
The legislation, which had been pushed vigorously by Planned Parenthood, had been strongly opposed by pro-life groups and some physicians, arguing that it amounted to legalizing back-alley abortions for profit.
In a statement, Gov. Brown boasted that AB 154 was one of seven bills signed Tuesday "to support the health and well-being of women in California."
California's Brown Signs Bill Permitting Non-Physician Abortions
Lets see. The liberals policies thrown many women out of work and prevent many of them from finding work and require many others of them to take an hours cut. But that's not enough for the liberals. For years they have yelled about preventing back alley abortions and they needed to be conducted legally by doctors. Well, here's progress the liberal way. Take a bad idea, make it worse and then call it a success.
bortion by medication or aspiration techniques in the first trimester of pregnancy if he or she holds a license or certificate authorizing him or her to perform the functions necessary for an abortion by medication or aspiration techniques.
Is this basically allowing non-physicians to hand out the morning after pill? If so, I have some reservations with anyone taking that level of medication without proper supervision, but I'm not sure it raises to the level of back alley abortions. But with that said, the more ideological elements of the pro-abortion crowd often seem to completely overlook the issue of patient safety and see any reasonable restrictions on the practice as being equal to banning it. I guess they're pretty similar to the gun nuts in that sense
Kind of equal measures sad and pathetic
Timely access to reproductive health services is critical to women's health," Atkins said in a statement. "AB 154 will ensure that no woman has to travel excessively long distances or wait for long periods in order to obtain an early abortion."
How is it a war on Women when all this does is give woman a safe and legal choice concering their body. If only every war was this bad.
Most abortions today are done with a pill. The idea that you need to be a doctor to hand someone a pill is comical. Do you even hear your own words?
Well this thread backfired badly. Hard to believe conservatives would distort "news"...
Jerry Brown is a monster. How dare he refer to himself as a Jesuit.
"Gov. Jerry Brown of California signed AB 154 on Wednesday, legalizing non-physician abortions in the state.
The legislation, which had been pushed vigorously by Planned Parenthood, had been strongly opposed by pro-life groups and some physicians, arguing that it amounted to legalizing back-alley abortions for profit.
In a statement, Gov. Brown boasted that AB 154 was one of seven bills signed Tuesday "to support the health and well-being of women in California."
California's Brown Signs Bill Permitting Non-Physician Abortions
Lets see. The liberals policies thrown many women out of work and prevent many of them from finding work and require many others of them to take an hours cut. But that's not enough for the liberals. For years they have yelled about preventing back alley abortions and they needed to be conducted legally by doctors. Well, here's progress the liberal way. Take a bad idea, make it worse and then call it a success.
Which explains why the law requires trained medical professionals...
I've never hear that he is a Jesuit, but if you'd like I know some Franciscans who have quite a bit of uncomplimentary things to say on the topic of Jesuits.
Sure...my aunt is a nurse anesthesiologist. That's some pretty powerful medication.reminds me of the type of logic that fueled the Gosnell case. Where any form of oversight was deemed as a means to discourage abortions, while ignoring legitimate questions of patient safety.
Would you support handing out any other powerful medication under such conditions? Also, is this fear of lack of access real, or like the gun nuts, is it born from excessive paranoia?
uhm this is already the case for the morning after pill as it falls in line with other pills of its classification to be that way. THis has been true for quite some times, actually this year the age availability was just lowered.
SO patient safety isnt being overlooked at all, the FDA controls that and a state bill cant sidestep that.
IM guessing you are confusing somethign else since non of that is factually true.
in what other instances do 'trained medical professionals" besides doctors, get to prescribe and administer drugs? Are physician assistants even authorized to do such, besides in the most routine applications?
Sure...my aunt is a nurse anesthesiologist. That's some pretty powerful medication.
Most states allow Nurse Practitioners to write prescriptions for some very powerful stuff.
I thought that as a conservative, Breitbart would love the free market being allowed to work. Greater competition means that consumers will be even more protected, because patients will have more options when it comes to their abortions. Bad practitioners will be pressured to improve or go out of business. Even then if he didn't agree with this, the same safety standards apply. And don't tell me that his line isn't just him editorializing. He didn't actually cite anyone, and it was the only opinion in the article. It's his opinion, which he never bothers to back up with evidence.
If you oppose abortions, talk about restricting abortions. Advocating for these extra "safety regulations" and then claiming that you are only looking out for women's safety is a complete load of horse****. If you oppose abortion, fine, talk about that, but the vast majority of laws currently being passed and advocated by pro-lifers goes far and away from keeping women safe and only seeks to restrict abortions.
how about EVERYDAY because YES they are.
most time i see a NP and she writes ALL my scrips, i actually havent seen my doctor in awhile, i like her better.
nothing you wrote addresses my point. You don't show that issues of patient safety are adequately dealt with when a licensed physician is removed from the discussion.
try again
there is no "argument" i provided FACTSlearn to argue a logical point: going "yes they are" isn't an argument with any logical merit. Now go "LMAO, blarg, etc," so you can add meaning to your day and we can discuss the topic
in what other instances do 'trained medical professionals" besides doctors, get to prescribe and administer drugs? Are physician assistants even authorized to do such, besides in the most routine applications?
actually EVERYTHING i wrote destroys your point
FDA controls the safety, and is STILL controlling the saftey, that hasnt changed
You won't like this answer, and it is why you should look things up yourself: Medical prescription - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Physician assistants, nurse practicioners, certified nurse-midwives in all 50 states. Kinda sounds like the list from the law...
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?