PDA

View Full Version : Proposed Law in Mexico Would Send Doctors Who Don't Suggest Abortion to Jail



Gingersnap
04-30-2010, 10:41 AM
Proposed Law in Mexico Would Send Doctors Who Don't Suggest Abortion to Jail
By Jana Winter
- FOXNews.com

Doctors who fail to inform their pregnant patients that they have the legal right to have an abortion -- or who refuse to refer women to doctors who perform abortions -- could be thrown into the slammer for up to four years, if the dominant political party in Mexico City's legislature has its way.

Doctors who fail to inform their pregnant patients that they have the legal right to have an abortion -- or who refuse to refer women to doctors who perform abortions -- could be thrown into jail for up to four years, if the dominant political party in Mexico City's legislature has its way.

A bill has been co-introduced by the city's Health Committee chairwoman and a leading legislator that would mandate that all pregnant women in Mexico City be informed that they have the right to have an abortion in their first three months.

The bill, which is being debated in the legislature and is expected to pass, has the support of more than a dozen members of Mexico City’s ruling Democratic Revolution party -- the same party that passed the 2007 law that legalized abortion in Mexico’s capital city.

If passed into law, doctors who do not discuss abortion with their pregnant patients will be subject to penalties that include one to four years in prison, heavy fines and the loss of their medical licenses.

Legal analysts in Mexico say the bill is the pro-choice activists' latest weapon in Mexico's increasingly contentious war over abortion.

The legislator who introduced the bill, Beatriz Rojas, says the law is needed because “moral or religious concepts intend to influence the decision of the woman, misinforming her or deceiving her, regarding the decision to interrupt the pregnancy."

Conservative groups are predictably aghast.

“This is absurd and stupid,” said Patricia Lopez Mancera, director of the Center for Women’s Studies and Comprehensive Formation in Cancun. “They say doctors should tell the pregnant women about it and recommend abortion -- can you imagine?”

“This is from the Nazi feminists in Mexico who are looking for a culture of death.”

WTF? What next? If you survive a near fatal car accident, would Mexican doctors be required to discuss euthanasia with you? :eek:

Fox (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04/29/proposed-law-mexico-send-doctors-dont-suggest-abortion-jail/?test=latestnews)

linda22003
04-30-2010, 11:36 AM
Maybe it's because the legality isn't well known? I didn't know. Still, I can't imagine bringing up the option unless a woman starts sobbing "Dios mio!" when she gets the results of her pregnancy test. :o

noonwitch
05-03-2010, 08:57 AM
Maybe it's because the legality isn't well known? I didn't know. Still, I can't imagine bringing up the option unless a woman starts sobbing "Dios mio!" when she gets the results of her pregnancy test. :o


I didn't know it was legal in Mexico until I saw this.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 09:02 AM
WTF? What next? If you survive a near fatal car accident, would Mexican doctors be required to discuss euthanasia with you? :eek:

Fox (http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/04/29/proposed-law-mexico-send-doctors-dont-suggest-abortion-jail/?test=latestnews)

Don't you think doctors should be sharing all options with patients that they may reasonably wish to choose, and that the law has guaranteed is their right to choose?

FlaGator
05-03-2010, 09:04 AM
Don't you think doctors should be sharing all options with patients that they may reasonably wish to choose, and that the law has guaranteed is their right to choose?

In this specific case, no.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 09:11 AM
In this specific case, no.

Figured... but I think this just goes to show that the supposed "love of freedom" that many of the conservative pro-life movement claim to have, is only skin deep.

FlaGator
05-03-2010, 09:19 AM
Figured... but I think this just goes to show that the supposed "love of freedom" that many of the conservative pro-life movement claim to have, is only skin deep.

My love of freedom concerns the freedom of the unborn to grow up with the same chance at life that I had. My concern for freedom, however, does not encompass those who would murder their unborn because carrying the baby to term and raising it is inconvenient. My love of freedom is much deeper than yours apparently. My love for freedom doesn't require a life to be taken.

Lager
05-03-2010, 09:24 AM
As I read the article, I got the feeling that the bill is more about population control than insuring the "freedoms" of impoverished Mexican woman.

PoliCon
05-03-2010, 09:25 AM
Figured... but I think this just goes to show that the supposed "love of freedom" that many of the conservative pro-life movement claim to have, is only skin deep.

Fucktard - the love of freedom does not include the love of the freedom to murder your unborn children. :rolleyes: Or do you think that those who love freedom should also support the freedom to rape? To steal? To slander? Pull your head out of your ass. :rolleyes:

wilbur
05-03-2010, 10:16 AM
Or do you think that those who love freedom should also support the freedom to rape? To steal? To slander? Pull your head out of your ass. :rolleyes:

Of course I don't, that's absurd. What makes abortion different, is that murder, rape, and theft are all pretty much universally, uncontroversially wrong - as well as illegal. So what you are really endorsing is the idea that medical professionals should be able to withhold pertinent medical information from their patients, in order to manipulate the patient's choice, so that it is agreeable with one's rather controversial philosophical view. That sure isnt the world I want to live in.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 10:18 AM
As I read the article, I got the feeling that the bill is more about population control than insuring the "freedoms" of impoverished Mexican woman.

You did read it on Fox News.... Just sayin.

Gingersnap
05-03-2010, 10:25 AM
Don't you think doctors should be sharing all options with patients that they may reasonably wish to choose, and that the law has guaranteed is their right to choose?

I think grown women are smart enough to request information on abortion if they are so inclined. There isn't a woman alive who doesn't already know that unwanted pregnancies can be terminated medically or through the use of herbs. Children in this position need to rely on their parents' guidance.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 10:35 AM
I think grown women are smart enough to request information on abortion if they are so inclined. There isn't a woman alive who doesn't already know that unwanted pregnancies can be terminated medically or through the use of herbs. Children in this position need to rely on their parents' guidance.

I'm sure most do - but I don't believe that assumption flies when talking about legally defining the ethical responsibilities of medical professionals. We would never tell a lawyer, for instance, that he is able to withhold information about certain laws, simply because he is uncomfortable with them, on the assumption that his clients should know the laws already.

noonwitch
05-03-2010, 11:39 AM
I'm sure most do - but I don't believe that assumption flies when talking about legally defining the ethical responsibilities of medical professionals. We would never tell a lawyer, for instance, that he is able to withhold information about certain laws, simply because he is uncomfortable with them, on the assumption that his clients should know the laws already.



Yes, but this is about abortion in Mexico, not in the US.

FlaGator
05-03-2010, 12:27 PM
I'm sure most do - but I don't believe that assumption flies when talking about legally defining the ethical responsibilities of medical professionals. We would never tell a lawyer, for instance, that he is able to withhold information about certain laws, simply because he is uncomfortable with them, on the assumption that his clients should know the laws already.

Then I suppose you have no issues with the Oklahoma law requiring those seeking abortion to view ultrasounds of the babies they are caring and having a doctor describe the fetus to the mother? We wouldn't want to withhold medical information would we?

wilbur
05-03-2010, 12:52 PM
Then I suppose you have no issues with the Oklahoma law requiring those seeking abortion to view ultrasounds of the babies they are caring and having a doctor describe the fetus to the mother? We wouldn't want to withhold medical information would we?


http://www.theonion.com/video/new-law-requires-women-to-name-baby-paint-nursery,14393/

FlaGator
05-03-2010, 01:12 PM
http://www.theonion.com/video/new-law-requires-women-to-name-baby-paint-nursery,14393/

Amusing evasion of the question.

Lager
05-03-2010, 01:30 PM
This isn't an issue about doctors witholding information --I agree that would be wrong. It's about mandating that they raise the procedure. Sounds like they worry that those poor catholic peasants are going to keep breeding, and I guess the well off don't like that much down there.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 01:34 PM
Amusing evasion of the question.

The subtext is that I feel such a procedure is akin to forcing a woman to paint a nursery and name her child before getting an abortion.

There is no real medical reason to force a woman to view an ultrasound - manipulation and coercion are the only motives for such a requirement. So no, I do not support it.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 01:44 PM
This isn't an issue about doctors witholding information --I agree that would be wrong. It's about mandating that they raise the procedure.

I'm not sure I see this as a meaningful distinction. The law looks like its about mandating that a women be fully informed of all the viable medical options available to her, abortion being one of those options.

FlaGator
05-03-2010, 02:15 PM
The subtext is that I feel such a procedure is akin to forcing a woman to paint a nursery and name her child before getting an abortion.

There is no real medical reason to force a woman to view an ultrasound - manipulation and coercion are the only motives for such a requirement. So no, I do not support it.

Sure there is a medical reason. It's to dis-spell any false notion that the baby is not really a baby and just a clump of cells when she can see it's head and arms and legs.

Seems like there is some medical information that you don't feel should be shared with a patient. You are mighty selective on the information you believe should and shouldn't be made available. Info you deem medically necessary is ok. Info that you deem is not necessary should be hushed unless the patient asks for it. You stated earlier that maybe someone don't know that abortion is available and should be told that it is an option. By that same logic maybe everyone doesn't know that a fetus looks like this

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-sum/fetus-human-6week.jpg

at 6 weeks. Why do you have a problem with expectant mothers being shown what their baby looks like, whether it is "medically necessary" or not?

wilbur
05-03-2010, 02:32 PM
Sure there is a medical reason. It's to dis-spell any false notion that the baby is not really a baby and just a clump of cells when she can see it's head and arms and legs.


You're proving my point - its all about manipulation and politics, not about passing along any relevant medical information.



Seems like there is some medical information that you don't feel should be shared with a patient. You are mighty selective on the information you believe should and shouldn't be made available. Info you deem medically necessary is ok. Info that you deem is not necessary should be hushed unless the patient asks for it. You stated earlier that maybe someone don't know that abortion is available and should be told that it is an option. By that same logic maybe everyone doesn't know that a fetus looks like this

at 6 weeks. Why do you have a problem with expectant mothers being shown what their baby looks like, whether it is "medically necessary" or not?

I have no problem with a medical professional offering to ultrasound a fetus for a mother considering abortion - but you havent offered any good reason to require it, except to legislate a last ditch opportunity to bully a woman out of an abortion.

wilbur
05-03-2010, 02:45 PM
On reflection, I might not even have an issue with a law requiring that a doctor offer to do an ultrasound before a woman chooses abortion.

The big glaring difference between the Arkansas legislation and the Mexican legislation should be obvious: One defines the obligations of our medical professionals for the patient, and the other is meant to foist an additional obligation onto the patient.

That obligation being the unreasonable requirement that the patient be subject to a rather overt ploy to manipulate her emotions such that she refuses abortion.

linda22003
05-03-2010, 02:47 PM
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-sum/fetus-human-6week.jpg

at 6 weeks. Why do you have a problem with expectant mothers being shown what their baby looks like, whether it is "medically necessary" or not?

That's a bad example of a baby looking like "a baby". :cool:

Lager
05-03-2010, 02:48 PM
I'm not sure I see this as a meaningful distinction. The law looks like its about mandating that a women be fully informed of all the viable medical options available to her, abortion being one of those options.

Perhaps you're reading a more detailed article about this proposed law somewhere else, but the one quoted in this post doesn't mention any other "viable medical options" besides abortion. It seems clear that they want to doctors to bring it up, in an effort to get more of the population to consider it. Perhaps because a majority are Catholic, perhaps not.

FlaGator
05-03-2010, 02:58 PM
You're proving my point - its all about manipulation and politics, not about passing along any relevant medical information.



I have no problem with a medical professional offering to ultrasound a fetus for a mother considering abortion - but you havent offered any good reason to require it, except to legislate a last ditch opportunity to bully a woman out of an abortion.

It's not manipulation unless you consider giving a woman all the information she needs to make an informed decision manipulating. I have links to several Planned Parenthood videos showing counselors lying and stating that at 6 weeks that you can't even tell it's a baby. Its only a clump of cells, no arms or legs or head. Now that is manipulative. It not only conceals information but states lies in order to persuade a woman that isn't not a baby that is being killed . I can post a couple if you'd like.

I look at this law as merely insuring that the truth is giving to the mother beforehand.