burntcopper: (just be a good boy)
[personal profile] burntcopper
here.

Previously you could get one if three doctors agreed your life was in danger.
In the 'features' bit here, they discuss it a bit more in detail.

You're not allowed to have one if you were raped. You're not allowed to have one if the mother's life is in danger, as the features one details about a woman who had one just before the ban came in - her child died in the womb, and subsequent internal bleeding and so on would probably have killed her.

As the article says, the main consequence of this will be a rocketing of deaths in childbirth and during pregnancy. The woman I mentioned, who just had an abortion, has a steaming great point. She has a daughter at home. What would have happened to her daughter if she'd died? Fucking hell. Do these people not remember what the main cause of death in women used to be, and still is in some places? Childbirth. Pregnancies going wrong without intervention. Men would sometimes go through three wives before they were 35.

Date: 2006-11-20 12:50 am (UTC)
mrslant: (Default)
From: [personal profile] mrslant
Ugh. How depressing. Stupid bastards.

Date: 2006-11-20 01:11 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] burntcopper.livejournal.com
yeah. I mean, I know abortion is illegal in many places, and there's plenty of people who don't believe in a woman's right to choose in this country, (to which I tend to consider the use of rusty knives) but even they'd agree with abortion on medical grounds. The fucking *pope* agrees with abortion on medical grounds. And they're saying the main reason for the new ban is because so much of the country is strongly catholic.

:headdesk:

Date: 2006-11-20 02:04 am (UTC)
mrslant: (Default)
From: [personal profile] mrslant
...and Ortega's going along with this? Daniel Ortega the Sandinista??? Unbelievable.

Date: 2006-11-20 11:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] burntcopper.livejournal.com
he got religion. tosser.

Date: 2006-11-21 12:55 am (UTC)
mrslant: (Default)
From: [personal profile] mrslant
Indeed.

Date: 2006-11-20 09:53 pm (UTC)
sabremeister: (basset hound)
From: [personal profile] sabremeister
Is it still an abortion if the foetus is dead already? If it has miscarried or died in the womb, is not a surgical procedure to remove the now-foreign body a good idea? It's not artificially terminating the pregnancy (ending a life) if the life is already ended.

*Sigh*

I'll add Nicaragua to the list of places that need to be overrun by termites when I'm Despotic Overlord of the World.

Date: 2006-11-20 11:59 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] burntcopper.livejournal.com
yeah. the 'abortion' means to terminate the pregnancy, which unfortunately is the catch-all term for removing a foetus of any state from the mother's body. And thus the anti-abortionists get to use the emotional language and foetus pics. One problem with miscarrying is that it doesn't always set off the body's internal alarms, which would normally cause it to go into labour, thus getting rid of the dead cellular tissue. or it gets stuck. which means you have to remove it surgically. So, abortion.

Profile

burntcopper: (Default)
burntcopper

April 2014

S M T W T F S
  12345
678910 1112
1314 1516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jan. 7th, 2026 08:01 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios