Posted on 01/31/2017 5:24:05 PM PST by markomalley
Utah legislators are close to banning telemed abortions. In telemedicine, healthcare providers prescribe medicine and advise patients who live in rural and far-off areas by telephone or computer so that mothers can commit do-it-yourself chemical abortions.
Although telemed abortions would be banned, the bill encourages and advances telemedicine in general in Utah, but for other medical procedures.
The House Public Utilities, Energy and Technology Standing Committee passed the bill on Monday, January 30. The bill has been sent to the full House for debate, where it's expected to pass.
Bill sponsor Rep. Ken Ivory commented, "If you're going to have an abortion, you have to see a doctor. You're not going to have an abortion by email or by remote technology."
Pro-life leaders have criticized the rise of "tele-abortions." Suzanne Ward with Georgia Right to Life commented:
The downsides of telemedicine include the cost of elaborate equipment and technical training. There is also greater potential for human error with telemedicine and an increased risk of compromising protected health information. More importantly, however, "virtual" medical care means the loss of the personal, human aspect of the doctor/patient relationship. Though there may be good uses of telemedicine, in the case of tele-med abortions there is no winner. The pre-born child is the obvious loser, but more and more mothers have found themselves on the losing side, as well.
In 2015, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled 6–0 that a 2013 law banning telemedicine in cases of abortion was unconstitutional.
The Iowa State Court ruled, "It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the board's medical concerns about telemedicine are selectively limited to abortion."
Jimmy Centers, spokesman for Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, commented, "The governor is extremely disappointed that the Iowa Board of Medicine's action, which ensured women received the high standard of care that they deserve, was reversed by the Iowa Supreme Court."
Jennifer Bowen, executive director of Iowa Right to Life, remarked, "We're devastated, but obviously we're not going to wave the white flag of surrender."
Utah is looking to join 19 other states that mandate that a doctor prescribing abortion-inducing drugs be present for the actual procedure.
In the wake of President Donald Trump's inauguration, pro-life leaders have been encouraged by his positive overtures to the pro-life community. Trump tweeted on January 27, 2017, "The #MarchForLife is so important. To all of you marching --- you have my full support!"
Vice President Mike Pence addressed the March for Life, becoming the highest-ranking government official to ever address the pro-life rally in person. In his speech Pence said:
Life is winning again in America, and today is a celebration of that progress. More than 240 years ago, our founders declared these truths to be self-evident — that we are, all of us, endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights and that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Forty-four years ago, our Supreme Court turned away from the first of these timeless ideals, but today, generations hence — because of all of you and the many thousands who stand with us in marches all across the nation — life is winning again in America.
On January 23, President Trump reinstated the Mexico City Policy, which cuts off all funding for abortions overseas.
The president of the Susan B. Anthony List, Marjorie Dannenfelser remarked, "President Trump's immediate action to promote respect for all human life, including vulnerable unborn children abroad, as well as conscience rights, sends a strong signal about his Administration's pro-life priorities."
How does a teledoc coaches procedure not encourage women to seek back alley abortions at home in the future?
Are they unable to procure the chemical agents by other means or to improvise?
The procedure may or may not be a smooth one.
If not, say good-bye to mom and fetus.
When you get medical care, do it with maximum redundancy.
Sitting out there miles from nowhere, and a problem comes up, your not just alone. Your dead.
I don’t want it banned ,, I want this to continue .. it is flagrantly and undeniably medical malpractice as the woman is never physically examined,, she may be pregnant but is it an ectopic pregnancy? The doctor has absolutely no idea and is aware that he has no idea when he provides the abortifacient pills which .. if they work to kill the baby will not expel a dead fetus from an ectopic pregnancy and will cause sepsis... I want to see PP and others sued out of existence ....
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.