• news
  • WEDNESDAY APRIL 18 2007 3:00 PM

SCOTUS: The Government Has the Right to Ban Medical Care (for Women)

Submitted by Bitch_PhD

Edited by Rahodeb

Tags: supreme court, partial birth abortion, intact D&X, health care, feminism, women's rights



Ladies, we're offically second-class citizens. This according to the Supreme Court, which today found that it's constitutional for lawmakers (aka white men) to decide what kind of medical care we need. In short, the Court upheld the "Partial Birth Abortion Ban." Despite the fact that "partial birth abortion" is not a medically recognized term.

What is medically recognized:


  • 90% of abortions occur in the first trimester.

  • Intact dilation and extraction (also known as IDX, or sometimes just D&X) is used in approximately .17% of all abortions.

  • It is probable (though definitive data do not exist) that the majority of IDX procedures are performed because of fetal abnormalities.

  • IDX, because it delivers a fetus whole, creates less risk of uterine perforation from bone fragments than other forms of late-term abortion.

  • IDX has less risk of infection than other forms of late-term abortion, because it takes less time and requires the insertion of fewer instruments into the uterus.

  • IDX (like other late-term abortion procedures) can prevent a woman who has found that her fetus is dead or not viable from having to undergo labor and delivery of a dead fetus.

  • IDX can allow women whose fetuses are not viable to view and hold their dead babies after delivery.

  • Most IDX procedures are performed between 20-24 weeks gestation--that is, within the second trimester, and before fetal viability.
    In cases where a fetus has severe hydrocephalus (water on the brain, which can cause a fetuses head to be grotesquely enlarged), the options to a woman may be IDX or a Cesarean section--that is, a three-day outpatient procedure or major surgery, with attendant potential complications.

  • The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists explicitly opposed the ban.

The law allows for IDX to be performed to save a woman's life--but not to save, say, her uterus. Because there are other surgical options for late-term abortions, it is highly unlikely that banning IDX will prevent a single abortion. It may, however, prevent some women from having the safest procedure for their particular circumstances.

What the court's decided, in essence, is that a woman's right to make her own medical decisions is less important than preventing legislators from getting an ooky feeling by thinking about fetal heads being punctured. Our safety is less important than their feelings.

Sources consulted for this article:


Bitch_PhD, who doesn't really have it in her to make snarky jokes about this decision, has cross-posted this at her own blog.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

Next

Comments
st_even

st_even

Milwaukee, WI
September 2006

APR 18, 2007 03:03 PM

Best cartoon ever. ^^^

RileyStClair

RileyStClair

Los Angeles, CA
September 2006

APR 18, 2007 03:05 PM

not to mention that precedent is conveniently chucked out the window in gonzales and the opinion doesn't even attempt to disguise the court's distaste for abortion in general.

it's just another of what will probably be a long line of cases that chip at roe bit by bit like a dismembered fetus in a D&E.

Twelve

Twelve

Bay City, MI
April 2007

APR 18, 2007 03:15 PM

yourfashionwar said:
not to mention that precedent is conveniently chucked out the window in gonzales and the opinion doesn't even attempt to disguise the court's distaste for abortion in general.

it's just another of what will probably be a long line of cases that chip at roe bit by bit like a dismembered fetus in a D&E.



"Precedent" is just a buzzword used by the courts to legitimize their decisions. The idea is that current decisions will be based on past ones -- they aren't just pulling shit out of their hats, in other words. That doesn't mean they can't change the laws, or reverse previous decisions by previous courts.

I haven't read this decision yet, but have you ever actually read Roe v. Wade? I'll be the first to stand up for a woman's right to an abortion, but talk about baseless court decisions. We've been lucky it's stood this long, as far as I'm concerned.

MschfMayhemSoap

MschfMayhemSoap

Phoenix, AZ
April 2006

APR 18, 2007 03:15 PM

Guess this is what is wrong with the "Supreme Court Justice for Life" term.

Also... is that an old picture... cause you say "White men" and I clearly see a Black man. In the back row.

d20

d20

San Francisco, CA
September 2003

APR 18, 2007 03:22 PM

that image up at the top is sorely lacking a caption. might i suggest "Bunch of Douchebags"?

Bitch_PhD

Bitch_PhD

I'm lost
February 2007

APR 18, 2007 03:23 PM

MschfMayhemSoap said:
Guess this is what is wrong with the "Supreme Court Justice for Life" term.

Also... is that an old picture... cause you say "White men" and I clearly see a Black man. In the back row.



There's a woman too. Exceptionalism means precisely that: exceptions. To the rule.

mydcmbr81

mydcmbr81

Wesley Chapel, FL
October 2003

APR 18, 2007 03:29 PM

Oh here we go. Look this decision isn't going to overturn Roe vs. Wade, it isn't even going to come close. As a matter of fact, people should be really happy with the court's make up right now. There are 4 consistenly Liberal voting judges, 4 consistently Conservative voting judges, and 1 guy that just seems to do what he thinks THE CONSTITUTION would do. Which is of course the whole damn point in the first place.

And the justice in question has already upheld Roe vs. Wade once before.

And in my honest opinion, I agree with the courts decision.

Oh and just to keep ya in the know, that whole "fetal viability" thing, yeah they actually have a child that was born after 21 weeks 6 days gestation and is now a healthy baby girl.

StopSnitchin

StopSnitchin

Hudson, NH
February 2004

APR 18, 2007 03:32 PM

That cartoon is PERFECT!
skull

RileyStClair

RileyStClair

Los Angeles, CA
September 2006

APR 18, 2007 03:32 PM

TwelveTone said:

yourfashionwar said:
not to mention that precedent is conveniently chucked out the window in gonzales and the opinion doesn't even attempt to disguise the court's distaste for abortion in general.

it's just another of what will probably be a long line of cases that chip at roe bit by bit like a dismembered fetus in a D&E.



"Precedent" is just a buzzword used by the courts to legitimize their decisions. The idea is that current decisions will be based on past ones -- they aren't just pulling shit out of their hats, in other words. That doesn't mean they can't change the laws, or reverse previous decisions by previous courts.

I haven't read this decision yet, but have you ever actually read Roe v. Wade? I'll be the first to stand up for a woman's right to an abortion, but talk about baseless court decisions. We've been lucky it's stood this long, as far as I'm concerned.



i am familiar with the definition of stare decisis thanks so much and i'm aware of how courts change their minds over time. it just irks me to see how they weasel out of the stenberg requirement for a health of the mother exception while totally disregarding evidence of credible doctors.

yes, i have read roe and i agree, it doesn't exactly have a strong foundation, but given that the other stuff that's been magically pulled out of the constitution, i can't really say it's a bad thing.

cupcakeOdoom

cupcakeOdoom

Baldwin, NY
March 2006

APR 18, 2007 03:38 PM

perfect cartoon. this ban is FUCKED UP, thanks for the rundown.

Louella

Louella

SUICIDEGIRL

California, USA

APR 18, 2007 03:55 PM

I'm learning the words to Canadian National Anthem as we speak....

unfiltrator

unfiltrator

San Francisco, CA
April 2004

APR 18, 2007 04:08 PM

I've got to start getting more political.

Charm

Charm

SUICIDEGIRL

Washington, USA

APR 18, 2007 04:08 PM

"The law allows for IDX to be performed to save a woman's life--but not to save, say, her uterus."

Not only am I angry about this, I'm also really really disappointed.
puke

RileyStClair

RileyStClair

Los Angeles, CA
September 2006

APR 18, 2007 04:16 PM

MschfMayhemSoap said:
Guess this is what is wrong with the "Supreme Court Justice for Life" term.

Also... is that an old picture... cause you say "White men" and I clearly see a Black man. In the back row.




oh my god please tell me that was a joke?

DrStinkypants

DrStinkypants

Saint Paul, MN
October 2002

APR 18, 2007 04:25 PM

yourfashionwar said:

TwelveTone said:

yourfashionwar said:
not to mention that precedent is conveniently chucked out the window in gonzales and the opinion doesn't even attempt to disguise the court's distaste for abortion in general.

it's just another of what will probably be a long line of cases that chip at roe bit by bit like a dismembered fetus in a D&E.



"Precedent" is just a buzzword used by the courts to legitimize their decisions. The idea is that current decisions will be based on past ones -- they aren't just pulling shit out of their hats, in other words. That doesn't mean they can't change the laws, or reverse previous decisions by previous courts.

I haven't read this decision yet, but have you ever actually read Roe v. Wade? I'll be the first to stand up for a woman's right to an abortion, but talk about baseless court decisions. We've been lucky it's stood this long, as far as I'm concerned.



i am familiar with the definition of stare decisis thanks so much and i'm aware of how courts change their minds over time. it just irks me to see how they weasel out of the stenberg requirement for a health of the mother exception while totally disregarding evidence of credible doctors.

yes, i have read roe and i agree, it doesn't exactly have a strong foundation, but given that the other stuff that's been magically pulled out of the constitution, i can't really say it's a bad thing.



Also, I'm not a lawyer, but I have to think that the Supreme Court's upholding of Roe Wade under various different attacks over a period of 30 years in and of itself lends strength and legitamacy to it.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

Next

featured interviews