Roe & Casey overturned.
-
Another thing that doesn’t make sense? How are they setting the gestation at exactly 6 weeks and 3 days? With Lu and Fin we were always told “6-8 weeks”, “18-20”, etc…
@LuFins-Dad said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Another thing that doesn’t make sense? How are they setting the gestation at exactly 6 weeks and 3 days? With Lu and Fin we were always told “6-8 weeks”, “18-20”, etc…
You can't. Not that precise.
-
Another thing that doesn’t make sense? How are they setting the gestation at exactly 6 weeks and 3 days? With Lu and Fin we were always told “6-8 weeks”, “18-20”, etc…
@LuFins-Dad said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Another thing that doesn’t make sense? How are they setting the gestation at exactly 6 weeks and 3 days? With Lu and Fin we were always told “6-8 weeks”, “18-20”, etc…
In my experience they can be pretty accurate. My wife is 12 weeks preggo now. When we went in for the first appointment around 6 weeks and they were able to estimate it was "6 weeks 3 days" during the ultrasound. Yes, we saw the heartbeat, too. Cool stuff. Anyway, we went back at 10 weeks to verify growth was normal and they verified the gestational age estimate was only a day off (so it was really 6 weeks 2 days at that first appointment) but they kept the same due date of Jan 22 next year.
-
This is going to muddy the waters.
-
@Mik said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
This is going to muddy the waters.
I think most states, even restrictive ones, have language that allows for abortion if needed to save the life of a mother, but often the language is vague so I would think doctors would be hesitant so as not to face charges.
So, this federal "reminder" (?) I think could help clarify that a bit, which is good. Although....I would imagine it's often hard to quantify the emergency/risk to a mother regarding an abortion, so maybe the waters remain muddy.
-
@Mik said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
This is going to muddy the waters.
I think most states, even restrictive ones, have language that allows for abortion if needed to save the life of a mother, but often the language is vague so I would think doctors would be hesitant so as not to face charges.
So, this federal "reminder" (?) I think could help clarify that a bit, which is good. Although....I would imagine it's often hard to quantify the emergency/risk to a mother regarding an abortion, so maybe the waters remain muddy.
@89th said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Although....I would imagine it's often hard to quantify the emergency/risk to a mother regarding an abortion, so maybe the waters remain muddy.
I think we can count on red state Attorneys General not to second guess a doctor’s emergency decision after the fact, just to have a high profile prosecution that gets him in the national news and generates political support among the GOP base.
Right?
Right?
-
@89th said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Although....I would imagine it's often hard to quantify the emergency/risk to a mother regarding an abortion, so maybe the waters remain muddy.
I think we can count on red state Attorneys General not to second guess a doctor’s emergency decision after the fact, just to have a high profile prosecution that gets him in the national news and generates political support among the GOP base.
Right?
Right?
@jon-nyc said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
@89th said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Although....I would imagine it's often hard to quantify the emergency/risk to a mother regarding an abortion, so maybe the waters remain muddy.
I think we can count on red state Attorneys General not to second guess a doctor’s emergency decision after the fact, just to have a high profile prosecution that gets him in the national news and generates political support among the GOP base.
Right?
Right?
Unless the doc is an activist.
-
@jon-nyc said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
@89th said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
Although....I would imagine it's often hard to quantify the emergency/risk to a mother regarding an abortion, so maybe the waters remain muddy.
I think we can count on red state Attorneys General not to second guess a doctor’s emergency decision after the fact, just to have a high profile prosecution that gets him in the national news and generates political support among the GOP base.
Right?
Right?
Unless the doc is an activist.
-
-
Arrest of and confession by the rapist, and confirmation by the police that the 10 year old indeed traveled to Indiana for abortion.
"A Columbus man has been charged with impregnating a 10-year-old Ohio girl, whose travel to Indiana to seek an abortion led to international attention ...*
Gershon Fuentes, 27, whose last known address was an apartment on Columbus' Northwest Side, was arrested Tuesday after police say he confessed to raping the child on at least two occasions. He's since been charged with rape, a felony of the first degree in Ohio.
Columbus police were made aware of the girl's pregnancy through a referral by Franklin County Children Services that was made by her mother on June 22, Det. Jeffrey Huhn testified Wednesday morning at Fuentes' arraignment. On June 30, the girl underwent a medical abortion in Indianapolis, Huhn said.
... -
@George-K said in Roe & Casey overturned.:
The status of a "fact."
Democracy dies in making shit up.
That chick seems really unreliable. It is definitely suspect that she captures a single sentence from WaPo piece yet refuses to link to the story. The actual story includes the original source, an Indianapolis OBGYN.
Maybe use the account for entertainment purposes only?
