Secular Right | Reality & Reason

Feb/12

19

Tests

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on RedditShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someoneShare on TumblrShare on Google+

Via CBS:

[Santorum] lambasted the president’s health care law requiring insurance policies to include free prenatal testing, “because free prenatal testing ends up in more abortions and therefore less care that has to be done because we cull the ranks of the disabled in our society.”

On the other hand Santorum probably does approve of the prenatal testing discussed by David Frum here:

…It is the Obama administration that is winning the communications war. Republicans blame the media. OK, maybe. But then Republicans do things like this in the state of Virginia:

HB 462 Abortion; informed consent, shall undergo ultrasound imaging.

“Abortion; informed consent. Requires that, as a component of informed consent to an abortion, to determine gestation age, every pregnant female shall undergo ultrasound imaging and be given an opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the abortion. The medical professional performing the ultrasound must obtain written certification from the woman that the opportunity was offered and whether the woman availed herself of the opportunity to see the ultrasound image or hear the fetal heartbeat. A copy of the ultrasound and the written certification shall be maintained in the woman’s medical records at the facility where the abortion is to be performed. This bill incorporates HB 261.”

The ABC news report on the Virginia bill explains:

“The ultrasound legislation would constitute an unprecedented government mandate to insert vaginal ultrasonic probes into women as part of a state-ordered effort to dissuade them from terminating pregnancies, legislative opponents noted.”

· ·

10 comments

  • Eric · February 20, 2012 at 1:59 am

    When the Federal government mandates it, every country ‘good ole boy’ goes ballistic. But, when a state mandates it everything’s okay? Not necessarily so, see 14th Ammendment, Section 1.

  • wm tanksley · February 20, 2012 at 2:10 am

    I find it stupid to complain about using ultrasounds in anatomically explicit language while describing the abortion itself in sanitized terms.

    AND… I agree that Santorum isn’t doing himself any favors. I AGREE with him on this, and still think that wasn’t well expressed.

    Unfortunately for him, my agreement with him probably won’t extend to my voting for his nomination. The issue he’s putting all his money on is important, but not the only issue.

  • D · February 20, 2012 at 5:26 am

    This man is literally pussy repellent. Fitting given his Google problem.

  • Susan · February 20, 2012 at 1:47 pm

    If the state can require you to have one medical procedure, then what’s to prevent it from compelling you to have other medical procedures down the line?

  • Eric · February 20, 2012 at 2:48 pm

    “The issue he’s putting all his money on is important, but not the only issue.”

    Let’s see: $1 Trillion++ government spending, unemployment, tax reform, international terrorism, oil imports and prices, Greece and the Euro, Iran, Syria, ….and I could probably think of at least a dozen more before even thinking of anything remotely related to abortion or contraception. How about a President who, instead of creating problems from issues which are otherwise not a problem for the country, is willing to tackle the issues which matter the most to the security and economic well-being of the ENTIRE country?

  • Polichinello · February 20, 2012 at 4:39 pm

    From the CBS site:
    Prenatal tests are a standard part of modern medical care.

    I can’t tell, because the story is very unclear–par for the course with today’s journalists–but Santorum appears to be talking about amniocentesis tests. These are “standard” in that they are performed, but they carry some risk to the fetus. There’s something like 1 in 500 risk of an abortion (IIRC). Now this is a 20 week fetus, with arms, legs, heart, brain, etc. I’ve seen the 4d Ultrasound image, and THAT was a baby. I say this, even though I’m as atheist as anyone here, but don’t tell me what I saw there was not human. I have to go with Hitchens here, and say to argue otherwise makes you a f***ing liar.

    The imaging the GOP is talking about is not invasive (unless you give credence to the sound causing distress). The idea is to give the woman involved an idea of what she’s doing. I’m not wild about the law, but it involves a test that is way, way different than what Santorum is probably talking about.

    Again, I’m not sure because the CBS report is so damned obscure–almost willfully so. Unsurprisingly, “sophisticated” conservatives gobble this up because it affords them a chance to look cool to their liberal betters, whom they always seem eager to appease.

  • Author comment by Andrew Stuttaford · February 20, 2012 at 7:13 pm

    Polichinello, as always, thanks for your comments. I should say, however, that the testing proposed by the GOP may indeed have to be invasive. In certain cases of early stage pregnancy, a ‘jelly on the belly’ ultrasound will not suffice to furnish a detailed enough image to satisfy the requirements of the proposed legislation.

    This story from the Washington Post is very much to the point. Here’s the key extract:

    “An amendment by Del. David Englin, D-Alexandria, would have allowed medical professionals to determine whether images can be obtained without being penetrated by equipment used in the ultrasound.

    “Women would have to give written consent to such a probe under Englin’s amendments, but not to sonograms that are not invasive. The amendment failed on 64-34 vote, setting the bill up for final House passage.

  • Polichinello · February 20, 2012 at 7:38 pm

    Considering the abortion procedure that’s being considering, the vaginal ultrasound is, at most, a short warm-up act.

    Again, I wouldn’t have voted for the bill, and I’m still pulling the lever for Romney. I not a Santorum fan, but what he’s talking about is at an entirely different stage of pregnancy, and it carries a not insignificant risk for what appears to any normal non-sociopath to be a human being.

  • A-Bax · February 20, 2012 at 9:58 pm

    I just can’t believe that when the issues of the day are 1) looming fiscal disaster, and 2) massive governmental overreach that the GOP is flirting with the idea of nominating a g-dd-amn culture warrior!!

    If Santorum is the nominee, I’ll vote for him, but only because I’d vote for ANYONE over Obama. But holy f-ing Christ, Santorum? Really? He couldn’t just focus on the coercive nature of the abhorrent mandate. He HAD to get down into the weeds of the pros and cons of contraception. (And yes, Obama “started” this by mandating contraception, but Santorum the Scold took the bait like a fool).

    I read something by Paul Ryan the other day that clearly and succinctly laid out the case for why the mandate is an unconstitutional overreach, and he did it while explicitly dismissing contraception as even relevant to the discussion.

    I get why people are sour on Romney, I really do. And I get it that Gingrich is unacceptable. But I really am beginning to fear that the single most destructive politician of my lifetime will win another term – despite spending the country into oblivion, despite defying court rulings to resume drilling in the Gulf, despite upending bankruptcy law vis a vis secured/unsecured creditors, despite the myriad and nearly uncountable discrepancies between his rhetoric as a candidate and his record as an executive, despite the most transparently demagogic and poisonous class warfare routine I’ve ever seen, despite massive unemployment, high-and-staying there gas prices, and finally, despite his completely unlawful seizure of ONE SIXTH of the economy – that despite all this, the Half-Blood Prince of Paradise will win another term because the GOP can’t produce an f-ing candidate with the right combination of intellect, temperament, and charisma to EVEN LAY OUT THE CASE AGAINST HIM convincingly.

    It’s getting the to point that if we lose, I’m going to seriously blame Paul Ryan for not running. What was his excuse again? Besides cowardice? He absolutely schooled Obama at the Blair House. He would shred Obama on substance and his style is not off-putting to moderates. The base knows he’s sincere. He’s not a culture warrior and he’s not a loose cannon. He’s likeable, presentable, and quick on his feet.

    And we’re stuck with a Jesus-freak, and empty suit, and a unguided, unstable rocket. THE FCUK!

  • RBM · February 27, 2012 at 8:35 am

    Most first trimester abortions are preformed using vacuum aspiration via the vagina.

    That necessarily involves vaginal penetration.

    That right there should make any complaint about the “probe” ridiculous on its face. By consenting to an abortion, you consent to penetration.

    If that’s not convincing, then you should know that ultrasounds are standard procedure as part of preforming abortions.

    Here’s what it said on the recording for the Virginia planned parenthood abortion services information hotline:

    “Patients who have a surgical abortion generally come in for two appointments. At the first visit we do a health assessment, perform all the necessary lab work, and do an ultrasound. This visit generally takes about an hour. At the second visit, the procedure takes place. This visit takes about an hour as well. For out of town patients for whom it would be difficult to make two trips to our office, we’re able to schedule both the initial appointment and the procedure on the same day.

    Medical abortions generally require three visits. At the first visit, we do a health assessment, perform all the necessary lab work, and do an ultrasound. This visit takes about an hour. At the second visit, the physician gives the first pill and directions for taking two more pills at home. The third visit is required during which you will have an exam and another ultrasound.”

<<

>>

Theme Design by devolux.nh2.me