Posted on 01/18/2017 9:44:00 AM PST by C19fan
Iowa lawmakers are considering a bill that would allow a woman who gets an abortion to sue the doctor who performed the procedure if she experiences emotional distress later.
If approved, it would be the first law of its kind in the U.S.
The proposal, which was endorsed Tuesday by a GOP-led three-member panel of lawmakers, would permit the woman to file a lawsuit at any point in her life, something that goes against typical statute of limitation rules. It could also make the state vulnerable to costly court challenges.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Excellent. Very good tactic.
Awesome
Kinda the same idea suing a gun manufacturer for the acts of a criminal. I get it.
Even though I object to abortion when used mainly as a form of birth control, this is not a good potential law. Among other effects, this may provide an excuse for some women not taking responsibility in deciding to have an abortion. Such laws would dilute the strength of a woman to issue a legal decision as an individual adult. Something a male chauvinist or Sharia follower would approve of.
I respectfully suggest that this should never become law.
It would open the door to anyone doing ANYTHING which resulted in a death of being sued.
Writing bad law is NOT the way to fix our country.
I give you the Americans for Disability Act as an example.
BTTT!
This is brilliant. Want an abortion? Go to Mexico or Canada.
I abhor abortion & want Roe overturned ASAP.
But is this potential law constitutional? Reads like something progressives would do.
Only people this would benefit is the lawyers, IMO.
Sorry, but this is a legal non-starter.
Maybe now women will get support for pregnancies instead of bf skirting it to get to pressure her to kill “it”
Makes a lot of sense. The doctor will, of course, demand the woman sign a waiver which will give her a chance to really think about what she is doing and the possible harm she will bring to herself (not to mention the baby).
Gun manufacturers do not pull the trigger for the criminal
The doctor specifies explicitly the kill. Technically speaking the woman does not have proof she has a live child. Only the “doctor” has proof of it.
What this will do is drive up insurance rates for abortion doctors who will then leave the business.
I recall that the child sex abuse laws were changed retroactively in many states to allow lawsuits decades after the offenses occurred. Which was pretty convenient for plaintiffs’ lawyers as the perpetrators were long gone (in many cases dead) along with most evidence apart from the plaintiff’s testimony.
Turning the plaintiffs’ lawyers loose on the abortionists seems to me to be a great way to raise their cost of doing their grisly business. I would take it a step further and enable the plaintiffs’ lawyers to sue employers of illegal aliens in the name of the government. Financially incentivize these sharks and we can shake the foundations of the world.
It also uses the "rape is anything I say it is" theory against those promoting it!
I wholly endorse.
" Such laws would dilute the strength of a woman to issue a legal decision as an individual adult."
I don' see ow that follows. How can making it possible for a woman to sue -- a woman who, as an individual adult, has suffered harm when the risk of harm had not been disclosed to her--- dilute her strength in any way?
Maybe I'm just not grasping our argument. Please explain.
This is a desperate and potentially unconstitutional gambit by the GOP..
Forget it, these people wouldn’t recognize a slippery slope if they were wearing skis.
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.