Should doctors be required to give Miranda to pregnant women?

[CanadaJohn]

... and if your moral compass always points away from you - and you direct which way it points. I believe any man who wants to force girls and women to have children against their will is a notably indecent man.

I would agree with you - thankfully, that's not me.

And I'm not getting into a discussion with someone who dishonestly tries to portray me as something I'm not.

Enjoy yourself and have a good day.

 

[Juanita]

No I'm not. I'm just not giving you one of the two answers you want me to give. You want a yes or no answer to a complex question. You have my answer and have had my answer.
No, they are not. Please see my example earlier about teachers reporting child abuse.
Yes...because pulling a fast one is possible on an Internet forum which never deletes posts...:roll:
No, I generally find it's more about pro-abortion for people like you.

Thanks for quoting me out of context...You know from what I already posted, that I and most other pro choice people, are not pro abortion..It's just your way of changing the focus away from you and your pro life views.....

 

[Juanita]

Actually, I'd say the woman should give up the child before she gets pregnant, not after - in other words, a woman in poverty who already has children and ends up pregnant again is just plain stupid. I understand people make mistakes in life, but I have no time for people who continue to make the same mistakes over and over again because of their own selfishness. That may be seen as harsh, but if women rightly want to claim to be masters of their own bodies, there is no excuse for any woman to become pregnant over and over again, with unwanted children, unless they are the victims of a crime. It's back to the old personal responsibility argument, which many reject.

It is obvious that you are a man..It does take two to make a baby, you know......

 

[CanadaJohn]

It is obvious that you are a man..It does take two to make a baby, you know......

It's obvious you're a woman - you need to unshackle yourself from that need to blame all your problems on men. Unless you're raped, you have control, and having control means you dictate when and if you get pregnant. It's one of the many responsibilities you'll have as a mature, contributing woman in society.

But since you no doubt support the current President who blames all his mistakes and poor governance choices on someone else, you've had poor role models to follow. Time to grow up and be a woman dear.

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

I cant believe people actually still respond to joko

 

[minnie616]

INTERESTING
I read this article the other day and just looked it up again:

Woman Who Had Baby Taken By State for a Poppy-Bagel False Positive Drug Test Settles** Lawsuit[/B]

July 3, 2013

A woman who had her newborn taken away because she failed a
hospital drug test after she ate a poppy seed bagel has settled a
lawsuit over the case.


Lawrence County’s child welfare agency and Jameson Hospital have
paid $143,500 to settle the suit filed on behalf of Elizabeth Mort
by the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, which
announced the settlement Tuesday.

Mort sued in October 2010, alleging that a poppy seed bagel she
ate shortly before arriving at the hospital spurred a positive test
for opiates in April 2010 that prompted the seizure of her
3-day-old daughter, Isabella Rodriguez.

Mort said she was home with her baby when a county child welfare
caseworker arrived with an emergency protective custody order and
took Isabella.

Woman Who Had Baby Taken By State for a Poppy-Bagel False Positive Drug Test Settles** Lawsuit | Libertarian

 

[GottaGo]

I cant believe people actually still respond to joko

It's the Train Wreck Syndrome.

No matter how revolting it may be, you just have to...... :wink:

 

[davidtaylorjr]

Many states require doctors to report to law enforcement if blood works shows evidence of substance abuse. This can be done without any notice to or consent from the woman, and the drug tests also done by the doctor without the woman's knowledge or consent. Upon this, the woman can be arrested, a search warrant issued, and her children taken by CPS.
Many states require doctors to report to law enforcement if blood works shows evidence of substance abuse. This can be done without any notice to or consent from the woman, and the drug tests also done by the doctor without the woman's knowledge or consent. Upon this, the woman can be arrested, a search warrant issued, and her children taken by CPS.

Since doctors in those states are REQUIRED to act as evidence gatherig agents of the police, shouldn't they be required to give a Miranda warning to their patients? Or is this a unique way that applies only to pregnant women around prohibitions of the police secretly taking blood samples without a person's consent or court order - and then using that evidence against the person?

Miranda only is necessary when being arrested. Has nothing to do with evidence collection.

 

[joko104]

I cant believe people actually still respond to joko

You like me, don't you? OK, it's alright. You may be my shadow.

 

[joko104]

Miranda only is necessary when being arrested. Has nothing to do with evidence collection.

No, that is totally wrong. Absolutely. Completely inaccurate.

 

[joko104]

It's obvious you're a woman - you need to unshackle yourself from that need to blame all your problems on men. Unless you're raped, you have control, and having control means you dictate when and if you get pregnant. It's one of the many responsibilities you'll have as a mature, contributing woman in society.

But since you no doubt support the current President who blames all his mistakes and poor governance choices on someone else, you've had poor role models to follow. Time to grow up and be a woman dear.

Yes, in this country Roe V Wade says she definitely has control meaning she dictates. You got that right.

 

[Juanita]

It's obvious you're a woman - you need to unshackle yourself from that need to blame all your problems on men. Unless you're raped, you have control, and having control means you dictate when and if you get pregnant. It's one of the many responsibilities you'll have as a mature, contributing woman in society.

But since you no doubt support the current President who blames all his mistakes and poor governance choices on someone else, you've had poor role models to follow. Time to grow up and be a woman dear.

That's not what you said in post #95.......Of course I support my President.... I think it is unpatriotic not to support your President.....My role models are all dead--dear....

 

[davidtaylorjr]

No, that is totally wrong. Absolutely. Completely inaccurate.

That is my understanding of it, granted I'm not law enforcement.

 

[lawboy]

After a little research I found that in 2001 SCOTUS ruled that hospitals cannot perform drug tests on pregnant women without their consent. Doctors had run drug tests on urine samples taken for other purposes as well and had reported the results to the police. SCOTUS says that is a violation of the 4th Amendment. Ferguson v. City of Charleston - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That was a STATE hospital, therefore the 4th applied.

For a private entity to be bound by the 4th AM, "state action" must be found.

To quote from an Ohio case dealing with such;


¶15} In short, “state action may be found if, though only if, there is such
a ‘close nexus between the State and the challenged action’ that seemingly private
behavior ‘may fairly be treated as that of the State itself.’ “ Id. at 295, 121 S.Ct.
924, 148 L.Ed.2d 807, quoting Jackson v. Metro. Edison Co. (1974), 419 U.S.
345, 351, 95 S.Ct. 449, 42 L.Ed.2d 477.

The 1st AM can also bind a private entity.

 

[lawboy]

However, Miranda does have to be read to anyone arrested or in custody (which probably encompasses a greater number of situations than you gave credit to) before "pertinent" questioning.

I disagree here, for two examples, see Pennsylvania v. Bruder and Berkmer v. McCarty.

Also, Miranda is a POST arrest issue, they do NOT have to be read at all. Only if they are not, generally, statements made before mirandizing a person can not be used in court against them.

Furthermore, I believe Miranda refers to the questioning of a suspect, not the gathering of evidence against him/her. A blood test would be evidence, not questioning.

A blood test is NOT "Testimonial" in nature, true.

 

[Sisyphus]

No. That's ridiculous, unless acting as a private citizen making a citizens arrest, maybe.

 

[Bodi]

Many states require doctors to report to law enforcement if blood works shows evidence of substance abuse. This can be done without any notice to or consent from the woman, and the drug tests also done by the doctor without the woman's knowledge or consent. Upon this, the woman can be arrested, a search warrant issued, and her children taken by CPS.
Many states require doctors to report to law enforcement if blood works shows evidence of substance abuse. This can be done without any notice to or consent from the woman, and the drug tests also done by the doctor without the woman's knowledge or consent. Upon this, the woman can be arrested, a search warrant issued, and her children taken by CPS.

Since doctors in those states are REQUIRED to act as evidence gatherig agents of the police, shouldn't they be required to give a Miranda warning to their patients? Or is this a unique way that applies only to pregnant women around prohibitions of the police secretly taking blood samples without a person's consent or court order - and then using that evidence against the person?

Hellz no... the Miranda is for when the suspect is being arrested... not investigated.

 

[Bodi]

INTERESTING
I read this article the other day and just looked it up again:



Woman Who Had Baby Taken By State for a Poppy-Bagel False Positive Drug Test Settles** Lawsuit | Libertarian

Stories like this force a person to hate the government.

 

[joG]

Many states require doctors to report to law enforcement if blood works shows evidence of substance abuse. This can be done without any notice to or consent from the woman, and the drug tests also done by the doctor without the woman's knowledge or consent. Upon this, the woman can be arrested, a search warrant issued, and her children taken by CPS.
Many states require doctors to report to law enforcement if blood works shows evidence of substance abuse. This can be done without any notice to or consent from the woman, and the drug tests also done by the doctor without the woman's knowledge or consent. Upon this, the woman can be arrested, a search warrant issued, and her children taken by CPS.

Since doctors in those states are REQUIRED to act as evidence gatherig agents of the police, shouldn't they be required to give a Miranda warning to their patients? Or is this a unique way that applies only to pregnant women around prohibitions of the police secretly taking blood samples without a person's consent or court order - and then using that evidence against the person?

How come you know about the tests but the women don't?

 

[joG]

"Mrs. Smith, I'm a mandatory child-abuse reporter. Just letting you know that if you beat your child, and I find out about it, you'll be reported to the proper authorities. So! You have the right to remain silent...."

I don't think a pregnant woman having blood tests should be Mirandized.

I would want to qualify that. It is always somewhat dangerous to suppress medical diagnosis via the risk of substance detection in people's blood. The result would be more infection etc. That sounds counterproductive.
In the case of pregnancy we see the same problem exacerbated by the fact that it increases certain risks to the unborn child. On the other hand, substance abuse can in some cases cause sever damage to the child and should be stopped.

 

[joG]

Yes, in this country Roe V Wade says she definitely has control meaning she dictates. You got that right.

You are probably right that with RvsW we got it wrong. But development of society is a process and bad developments can be corrected and must, to prevent damage.

 

[minnie616]

How come you know about the tests but the women don't?

jako104 has not posted here for months but if recall correctly , he and wife ran a state licensed protective place ( their own private large house located on a lot of protected land )'for young pregnant women who stayed with them while they made up their own minds without unwelcomed outside influence from friends and family whether to continue their pregnancy or to have a legal abortion. His wife was a victim of rape ( by someone else ) when he married her and claimed the child as his to protect her and the child from the rapist.

 

[JayDubya]

jako104 has not posted here for months but if recall correctly , he and wife ran a state licensed protective place ( their own private large house located on a lot of protected land )'for young pregnant women who stayed with them while they made up their own minds without unwelcomed outside influence from friends and family whether to continue their pregnancy or to have a legal abortion. His wife was a victim of rape ( by someone else ) when he married her and claimed the child as his to protect her and the child from the rapist.

A) This bump was completely unwarranted. The only thing this thread has to do with abortion is by being one.

B) If you believed any of joko104's stories, I have some great opportunities in bridge and Arizona oceanfront real estate for you to consider.