Wisconsin forces women to get ultrasound!!!!!

[nota bene]

I won't argue with the first part of your post, but I will with the second. If a doctor is going to perform an abortion -- which isn't like a tooth extraction -- things can go wrong. With general anesthetic things can go wrong. With abortions, hemorrhaging can occur. If a doctor doesn't have admitting privileges, he may be reluctant to get her to the hospital. This is just common sense to me.

I was just Googling around--can't remember if I've read or seen video of PP employees telling clients that the fetus is simply "tissue." Haven't found what I'm looking for, but I did find this:
Constitutionality of Mandating the Performance of an Ultrasound Before An Abortion | Americans United for Life | AUL.org

And this, from a group with which I'm unfamiliar:

Ultrasound is the “gold standard” of care in the abortion context.

Ultrasound is necessary to accurately determine the gestational age of the unborn child. Because different procedures are riskier or even contraindicated later in pregnancy, maternal health is protected by determining gestational age in the most accurate manner. Further, ultrasound is necessary to accurately determine the location of the pregnancy, and specifically to ensure that there is not an ectopic pregnancy which, if left undiagnosed, can result in infertility, rupture of the fallopian tube, and even fatal blood loss.[4]

Abortion providers routinely admit to using ultrasound before performing abortions. In 2012, a Virginia League for Planned Parenthood voice message informed patients that an ultrasound would be performed prior to either surgical or chemical abortion.[5] More tellingly, abortion providers have never challenged in court the actual requirement that an ultrasound be performed. Laws requiring ultrasound before abortion do not change the current practice of those abortion providers currently providing ultrasound; but such laws do ensure that other providers—who are not providing ultrasound and are not protecting woman’s health—begin providing them.

Constitutionality of Mandating the Performance of an Ultrasound Before An Abortion | Americans United for Life | AUL.org

 

[Fisher]

Thirty years from now massive demographic change will have reduced the GOP to a minor, regional party with no national power.

Well when democrats run out of republican money to spend let's see how long they stay in power. Mexican reunification is not going to favor the progressive agenda they way you seem to think--Hispanics are not going to be busting their ass in upper Mexico so a bunch of deadbeat strangers can suck off them. Oh the humanity--having to choose between the blacks and the Hispanic--whatever will the democrats do?

Not my problem either way. Open the borders and let them all in. I want them here. There is nothing that will destroy the progressive agenda like letting in a bunch of people who actually want to work.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Referring only to the ultrasound part, I don't know that I really have a problem with it. No one is forcing the woman to get an ultrasound, but if she wants to have the abortion, it's a step she has to take. I mean, when I wanted to be a teacher, I HAD to go to college to get my degree. No one made me have to go into teaching, but if it is what I want to do, then it was the step I have to take.

As an avid pro-choice supporter, I have no problem with forcing the ultrasound first.

Umm, if it is a step "she has to take" then she is being forced to do it. Prior to this it was NOT a step she had to take to get an abortion. Your comparison to teaching is a false analogy because teachers have always had similar requirements (at least a higher education than those being taught).

 

[trfjr]

Referring only to the ultrasound part, I don't know that I really have a problem with it. No one is forcing the woman to get an ultrasound, but if she wants to have the abortion, it's a step she has to take. I mean, when I wanted to be a teacher, I HAD to go to college to get my degree. No one made me have to go into teaching, but if it is what I want to do, then it was the step I have to take.

As an avid pro-choice supporter, I have no problem with forcing the ultrasound first.

Umm, if it is a step "she has to take" then she is being forced to do it. Prior to this it was NOT a step she had to take to get an abortion. Your comparison to teaching is a false analogy because teachers have always had similar requirements (at least a higher education than those being taught).

and to have a wisdom tooth pulled the dentist is required to take an x-ray.
never held the left complain about that
so why are they complaining about an ultra sound before sucking a baby out of them

 

[Captain Adverse]

and to have a wisdom tooth pulled the dentist is required to take an x-ray.
never held the left complain about that
so why are they complaining about an ultra sound before sucking a baby out of them

Probably because (a) it's an additional cost to the woman (unless the state is agreeing to pay???) and (b) it's just an attempt by pro-life factions to emotionally blackmail a woman who has already undergone a personal crisis leading to her "final" decision.

 

[Slyfox696]

Umm, if it is a step "she has to take" then she is being forced to do it.

No, she doesn't have to have an abortion. If she doesn't have the abortion, she doesn't have to have the ultrasound to get the abortion.

Prior to this it was NOT a step she had to take to get an abortion.

But it is now. So the woman either decides to go along with it or not.

Your comparison to teaching is a false analogy because teachers have always had similar requirements (at least a higher education than those being taught).

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. Someone made it a rule at some point that to be an educator you had to have a degree/license to teach. Just like Wisconsin just now made it a requirement to have an ultrasound.

Probably because (a) it's an additional cost to the woman

A voluntary additional cost. Again, no one is forcing the woman to go through the process of an abortion.

(b) it's just an attempt by pro-life factions to emotionally blackmail a woman

Perhaps, but what's wrong with the idea of requiring full knowledge of the act you're about to commit? Why is ignorance more desirable?

 

[Captain Adverse]

No, she doesn't have to have an abortion. If she doesn't have the abortion, she doesn't have to have the ultrasound to get the abortion.

But it is now. So the woman either decides to go along with it or not.

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. Someone made it a rule at some point that to be an educator you had to have a degree/license to teach. Just like Wisconsin just now made it a requirement to have an ultrasound.

A voluntary additional cost. Again, no one is forcing the woman to go through the process of an abortion.

Perhaps, but what's wrong with the idea of requiring full knowledge of the act you're about to commit? Why is ignorance more desirable?

That's a very circular argument in support of this new "requirement." "It wasn't before but it is now so she has to do it if she wants such and so even if she didnt have to do it before." Any way you write it she IS being forced to do it. Arguing that "she doesn't have to have an abortion" is a win for pro-life.

 

[Slyfox696]

That's a very circular argument in support of this new "requirement." "It wasn't before but it is now so she has to do it if she wants such and so even if she didnt have to do it before."

Nothing circular about it. Do you understand what a circular argument actually is?

Any way you write it she IS being forced to do it.

No, she's not. She's only being forced to do it if she wants an abortion.

Arguing that "she doesn't have to have an abortion" is a win for pro-life.

No, it's a win for pro-choice. Pro-choice is not the same thing as pro-abortion. Pro-choice is completely about making the choice of what to do with your body. If the woman feels this requirement is too stringent, she has the choice not to go through with it. If she doesn't feel that way, she has the choice to have the abortion.

Pro choice is not the same thing as pro abortion. You seem to be arguing on the side of pro abortion right now.

 

[JayDubya]

Any way you write it she IS being forced to do it.

Well, no. Because we can write it quite plainly that no one is being forced to elect this procedure.

 

[MaggieD]

I was just Googling around--can't remember if I've read or seen video of PP employees telling clients that the fetus is simply "tissue." Haven't found what I'm looking for, but I did find this:
Constitutionality of Mandating the Performance of an Ultrasound Before An Abortion | Americans United for Life | AUL.org

And this, from a group with which I'm unfamiliar:

Ultrasound is the “gold standard” of care in the abortion context.

Ultrasound is necessary to accurately determine the gestational age of the unborn child. Because different procedures are riskier or even contraindicated later in pregnancy, maternal health is protected by determining gestational age in the most accurate manner. Further, ultrasound is necessary to accurately determine the location of the pregnancy, and specifically to ensure that there is not an ectopic pregnancy which, if left undiagnosed, can result in infertility, rupture of the fallopian tube, and even fatal blood loss.[4]

Abortion providers routinely admit to using ultrasound before performing abortions. In 2012, a Virginia League for Planned Parenthood voice message informed patients that an ultrasound would be performed prior to either surgical or chemical abortion.[5] More tellingly, abortion providers have never challenged in court the actual requirement that an ultrasound be performed. Laws requiring ultrasound before abortion do not change the current practice of those abortion providers currently providing ultrasound; but such laws do ensure that other providers—who are not providing ultrasound and are not protecting woman’s health—begin providing them.

Constitutionality of Mandating the Performance of an Ultrasound Before An Abortion | Americans United for Life | AUL.org

Great job!! Thanks!! Seems to me this is another "much ado about nothing," and it's a law that protects people. *shrug*

 

[trfjr]

Probably because (a) it's an additional cost to the woman (unless the state is agreeing to pay???) and (b) it's just an attempt by pro-life factions to emotionally blackmail a woman who has already undergone a personal crisis leading to her "final" decision.

and it is not an extra cost for that x-ray at the dentist office? an ultra sound is alot cheaper then an x-ray and the equipment is alot cheaper also

 

[sangha]

and to have a wisdom tooth pulled the dentist is required to take an x-ray.

Untrue

There's is no requirement for an x-ray before pulling a wisdom tooth

 

[Captain Adverse]

Pro choice is not the same thing as pro abortion. You seem to be arguing on the side of pro abortion right now.

Ummm no, because anything that puts more stumbling blocks in the way of a mothers choice, and whose sole purpose is to convince her not to have one, is not really very supportive of pro-choice.

Supporting this type of action is condoning the idea that it's okay to put as many roadblocks up as possible, because after all, if she is really committed to having an abortion, it won't matter will it?

Well, a self-assured woman with years of life experience might easily pass such a test. Young girls and women who are not as prepared for the burdens of childbirth and rearing...not so much. (Please don't respond with "well they were adult enough to choose sex, they are adult enough to be put through the ringer before choosing to having an abortion.")

(I'm also anti-gun control, so I don't like allowing "minor" limitations which only lead to more and more until the right disappears either.)

 

[trfjr]

Untrue

There's is no requirement for an x-ray before pulling a wisdom tooth

1) An x-ray will be required.

As a part of this examination, your dentist will need to take an x-ray (radiograph). It will allow them to evaluate changes within the tooth as well as its root(s) and the bone that surrounds it.

Tooth extractions: The more you know about having your tooth pulled, the easier it will be.

 

[tererun]

and to have a wisdom tooth pulled the dentist is required to take an x-ray.
never held the left complain about that
so why are they complaining about an ultra sound before sucking a baby out of them

Every time i have had to have a tooth extracted the X-ray was taken for the purposes of determining if the tooth could be saved. In the case of an abortion the material is already going to be extracted whether or not it is healthy. So these situations are entirely different.

 

[ItAin'tFree]

This is why some protesters had a sign saying "If I wanted the government in my womb I would have asked a senator to f*** me."

Lets hope everyone who held such a sign means it. To bad I doubt they do. Because to do such would require just a little bit of personal responsibility on their part or at minimum their sex partners as the situation they are in is so easily avoidable. At the end of the day my guess would be the phony slogan means more to them than the ultrasound procedure. I doubt that requirement will keep many women out of an abortion clinic but it might save some lives, both mothers and baby's.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Great job!! Thanks!! Seems to me this is another "much ado about nothing," and it's a law that protects people. *shrug*

Yes, ultrasound is typical, but is this state requiring an additional one? One used simply to try to convince the mother to keep it? If not, and it is really just a rubber stamp for a practice she has already paid for. I have no further problems with it.

 

[tererun]

1) An x-ray will be required.

As a part of this examination, your dentist will need to take an x-ray (radiograph). It will allow them to evaluate changes within the tooth as well as its root(s) and the bone that surrounds it.

Tooth extractions: The more you know about having your tooth pulled, the easier it will be.

As said by your own article

The information that your dentist obtains from their clinical examination and the x-ray will help them formulate an opinion as to why the tooth should, or should not, be extracted.

So clearly the reason for the X-ray is not to determine the health problems with pulling the tooth, but rather to determine if other methods can be applied to save it. Since you do not want to save the fetus in the case of the abortion the argument does not apply. Unlike an unwanted pregnancy many people would prefer to keep their teeth if possible.

 

[Etoner]

Well, no. Because we can write it quite plainly that no one is being forced to elect this procedure.

Any woman who wants an abortion is forced to first get a sonogram.

Just to rub it in that she is killing her ZEF.

So that the Conservatives get to harrass her one last time. If they can't stop her from doing it, they can at least FORCE her to feel real bad about it.

That's all this is about and this law is insanely unConstitutional.

Shame!!!

 

[trfjr]

Ummm no, because anything that puts more stumbling blocks in the way of a mothers choice, and whose sole purpose is to convince her not to have one, is not supportive of pro-choice.

Supporting this type of action is condoning the idea that it's okay to put as many roadblocks up as possible, because after all, if she is really committed to having an abortion, it won't matter will it?

Well, a self-assured woman with years of life experience might easily pass such a test. Young girls and women who are not as prepared for the burdens of childbirth and rearing...not so much. (Please don't respond with "well they were adult enough to choose sex, they are adult enough to be put through the ringer before choosing to having an abortion.")

(I'm also anti-gun control, so I don't like allowing "minor" limitations which only lead to more and more until the right disappears either.)

its called regulations the left doesn't have a problem regulating everything in a persons life but abortions
we have the right to own a gun and that is in the constitution and says should not be infringed upon but the left wants to put up as many as you call it "road blocks" as they can to keep that from happening

 

[Etoner]

its called regulations the left doesn't have a problem regurgitating everything in a persons life but abortions
we have the right to own a gun and that is in the constitution and says should not be infringed upon but the left wants to put up as many as you call it "road blocks" as they can to keep that from happening

Which brings up a great point. Would Conservatives support abortion rights if the mother terminated the fetus with a Smith & Wesson?

 

[sangha]

1) An x-ray will be required.

As a part of this examination, your dentist will need to take an x-ray (radiograph). It will allow them to evaluate changes within the tooth as well as its root(s) and the bone that surrounds it.

Tooth extractions: The more you know about having your tooth pulled, the easier it will be.

Your link says nothing about any requirement to take an x-ray

 

[Captain Adverse]

its called regulations the left doesn't have a problem regurgitating everything in a persons life but abortions
we have the right to own a gun and that is in the constitution and says should not be infringed upon but the left wants to put up as many as you call it "road blocks" as they can to keep that from happening

Ummm, yes I agree. Okay? (Nothing to argue about here folks, move along)

 

[nota bene]

As said by your own article



So clearly the reason for the X-ray is not to determine the health problems with pulling the tooth, but rather to determine if other methods can be applied to save it. Since you do not want to save the fetus in the case of the abortion the argument does not apply. Unlike an unwanted pregnancy many people would prefer to keep their teeth if possible.

Have you heard of an impacted wisdom tooth?

 

[nota bene]

Lets hope everyone who held such a sign means it. To bad I doubt they do. Because to do such would require just a little bit of personal responsibility on their part or at minimum their sex partners as the situation they are in is so easily avoidable. At the end of the day my guess would be the phony slogan means more to them than the ultrasound procedure. I doubt that requirement will keep many women out of an abortion clinic but it might save some lives, both mothers and baby's.

Two little girls were holding these signs. Scroll down to see pic: The Conservative Meme of Satan-Loving Texas Pro-Choice Protesters Is a Bit Off - Elspeth Reeve - The Atlantic Wire