Posted on 12/22/2014 11:10:25 AM PST by TangledUpInBlue
A North Carolina law requiring abortion providers to not only conduct an ultrasound but describe its content in detail to women seeking an abortion — whether or not they have asked for or want to receive an ultrasound — was blocked on Monday, December 22, by the Fourth Circuit court of appeals.
The law was preliminarily blocked in October 2011 and also deemed unconstitutional by a federal court in January 2014.
In its ruling, the Fourth Circuit determined that the law prohibits a physician’s right to free speech by mandating what conversations doctors are required to have with their patients, “while simultaneously threatening harm to the patient’s psychological health, interfering with the physician’s professional judgment, and compromising the doctor-patient relationship.”
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
The education has to take place at the beginning of the process - not at the 11th hour under the duress of actually having the procedure done.
And to put it on the physicians shoulders is tantamount to cowardice by lawmakers. To say nothing of how this would ever be enforced.
Wouldn’t want anyone to see who is eventually being beheaded and dismembered even worse than our pagan religion-of-peace bastards.
While the savage pagans behead one or two humans each month, we savagely dismember, behead, and rip apart helpless innocent babies 3,300 times EACH DAY.
Shame, shame on nasty on ultrasound!
ping
I am sorry that you are conflicted by this.
"physicians?" Don't you mean, pre-meditated butchers of unborn babies?
All the more reason to realize this law is stupid and will never work.
“to put it on the physicians shoulders is tantamount to cowardice”
“physicians?” Don’t you mean, pre-meditated butchers of unborn babies?
The fang-tooth feminazis’ tentacles extend even into the courts.
In other words, it's a facile legal argument that they wouldn't have much enthusiasm for if it were applied, say, to a requirement that doctors must provide safety information to those keeping guns in their homes.
In its ruling, the Fourth Circuit determined that the law prohibits a physician’s right to free speech by mandating what conversations doctors are required to have with their patients
This is simply a preposterous rationale.
By law, employers must post the wage law in a format approved by the Department of Labor in their break rooms or other publicly available locations.
How does this not infringe on an employers free speech rights, by dictating what he is required to tell his employees?
Whoever said I was conflicted? This is just nothing more than bureaucratic nonsense and a poorly written law. Not to mention a waste of time and money.
It’s about education. That has to be done before hand - not at the last minute.
“All the more reason to realize this law is stupid and will never work.”
Anything that makes it harder or more expensive to perform an abortion will save lives.
The author of the opinion:
Wilkinson, James Harvie III
Born 1944 in New York, NY
Federal Judicial Service:
Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Nominated by Ronald Reagan on January 30, 1984, to a seat vacated by John Decker Butzner, Jr.. Confirmed by the Senate on August 9, 1984, and received commission on August 13, 1984. Served as chief judge, 1996-2003.
Education:
Yale University, B.A., 1967
University of Virginia School of Law, J.D., 1972
Professional Career:
U.S. Army, 1968-1969
Republican candidate for U.S. House of Representatives from Virginia, 1970
Law clerk, Hon. Lewis F. Powell, Supreme Court of the United States, 1972-1973
Faculty, University of Virginia School of Law, 1973-1978, 1983; associate professor, 1973-1978; professor, 1983
Editorial page editor, Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, 1978-1981
Deputy assistant attorney general, Civil Rights Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 1982-1983
Fair point. But to make it even more ridiculous, any such discussion had between doctor and patient would be subject to confidentiality privilege to begin with and the spate of HIPPA laws.
While I applaud the intent, this was just dumb.
In its ruling, the Fourth Circuit determined that the law prohibits a physician’s right to free speech by mandating what conversations doctors are required to have with their patients, “while simultaneously threatening harm to the patient’s psychological health, interfering with the physician’s professional judgment, and compromising the doctor-patient relationship.”
BUT it’s OK for them to ask you if you have any guns at home.
Agreed. But this law does neither.
As current laws stand, an abortionist and his staff can tell a woman anything to get her to have an abortion. In fact, they put a lot of pressure on her to have that abortion. They do not, as a rule, give any actual information regarding stage of fetal development or how much pain the fetus suffers during the murder procedure. However, they do tell a lot of lies—for instance, that there is nothing but a “clump of cells” and referring to the baby consistently as a “product of conception.”
This pressure starts long before pregnancy occurs. Planned Parenthood has a decades-long running advertising campaign conducted in high schools under the guise of reproductive education.
The abortion industry also keeps repeating the mantra that somehow, abortion is about women’s rights. How it enables women’s rights is a mystery, one that they never explain. But young women fairly predictably fall for it.
Laws such as those requiring ultra-sounds, waiting periods, etc., are meant to reduce the impact of the high-pressure sales tactics that abortionists employ to ensure that any woman entering their facility will make one “choice”, and one “choice” only. Only abortionists are exempt from full disclosure about their practices; if you seek any kind of actual legitimate medical care, the doctor is required to explain the care to you, its risks, and you have to sign an agreement that you understand. I’m certain that abortionists also have their clients sign agreements, but the agreements in this case are as untruthful as anything else the abortionist tell their clients.
I would agree that the education should start long before a woman makes that decision to get pregnant with a child she intends to terminate. The abortion industry agrees also, which is why they start their sales campaigns while girls are in high school, while many are still virgins. Our challenge is to stop that early ad campaign, and to really educate women and young girls.
The first point of education, IMO, is to get them to understand that the abortionist is NOT their friend. Someone who can murder babies without a second thought would murder anyone just as easily, if they could get away with it—because they don’t respect human life.
I don’t see how it could be wrong for physicians to “shoulder” this. It certainly isn’t any burden unless the physician is ideologically compromised.
An ultrasound may well be essential to informed consent, which is required of physicians.
How is it different than requiring doctors to warn of the dangers of guns in the home?
Regardless of the child’s origin, he/she does not deserve the death penalty. Adoption is always an option.
I was hoping someone would make this connection.
Liberals and hypocrisy? Nothing to see see - move along...
“Fair point. But to make it even more ridiculous, any such discussion had between doctor and patient would be subject to confidentiality privilege to begin with and the spate of HIPPA laws..”
HIPAA has nothing to do with it. The govt mandates all kinds of stuff the doctors have to say to patients. For example if a doctor decides to test you for HIV (or you request it) the doctor is required to report it to the govt.
This is a political decision, pure and simple.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.