Louisiana House agrees to 72-hour wait period for abortion - Polidicks

[quote]The Louisiana House has voted to triple the wait time for women seeking an abortion to 72 hours. If passed by the Senate, Louisiana would match five other states with the longest waiting periods in the country.[/quote] [url]http://www.shreveporttimes.com/story/news/local/2016/04/07/louisiana-house-agrees-hour-wait-period-abortion/82740096/[/url]

A+ job. As I can see Louisiana right on the other side of the lake as I sit on my back porch in Mississippi, I know I'm sandwiched between two bastions of progressive thinking.

May I ask what the point of waiting periods are? is it to make the "mother" think the abortion through? or is there a deeper thing behind it? [QUOTE]Mandatory ultrasounds[/QUOTE] what

Unless I'm missing something, (the 72 hours pushing someone beyond the allowed timeline for an abortion?) this hardly seems like a big deal. In the grand scale of potential "pro-life" legislation possibilities, this seems very minor. I'd even go so far as to say I support it; it's not a decision to make in the heat of the moment.

[QUOTE=Canesfan;50095516]Unless I'm missing something, (the 72 hours pushing someone beyond the allowed timeline for an abortion?) this hardly seems like a big deal. In the grand scale of potential "pro-life" legislation possibilities, this seems very minor. I'd even go so far as to say I support it; it's not a decision to make in the heat of the moment.[/QUOTE] Like the article says, the wait is already 24 hours and its just going to be an inconvenience anyway. If the woman wants an abortion she is probably pretty determined to get one. Here are a list of Louisiana abortion restrictions: [quote] Abortion would be banned if Roe v. Wade were to be overturned. A woman must receive state-directed counseling that includes information designed to discourage her from having an abortion and then wait 24 hours before the procedure is provided. Counseling must be provided in person and must take place before the waiting period begins, thereby necessitating two separate trips to the facility. Health plans that will be offered in the state’s health exchange under the Affordable Care Act may not provide coverage of abortion. The use of telemedicine for the performance of medication abortion is prohibited. The parent of a minor must consent before an abortion is provided. Public funding is available for abortion only in cases of life endangerment, rape or incest. A woman must undergo an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion; the provider must show and describe the image to the woman. An abortion may be performed at or after 20 weeks postfertilization (22 weeks after the woman’s last menstrual period) only if the woman’s life is endangered, her physical health is severely compromised or the pregnancy is “medically futile,” based on the spurious assertion that a fetus can feel pain at that point. [/quote]

[QUOTE=da space core;50095515][QUOTE]Mandatory ultrasounds[/QUOTE] what[/QUOTE] Don't tell me they're gonna do this to make women feel guilty about aborting.

The anti-abortion counseling, the long waiting period, the forced ultrasound. It's all about guilt-tripping the woman as hard as they can.

Somehow I can't understand how TRAP legislation hasn't been declared an undo burden at this point, it's literally in the fucking name

[QUOTE=Map in a box;50095543]Like the article says, the wait is already 24 hours and its just going to be an inconvenience anyway. If the woman wants an abortion she is probably pretty determined to get one. Here are a list of Louisiana abortion restrictions:[/QUOTE] Don't get me wrong. Those restrictions are absurd and this new legislation seems inconsequential- I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something.

[QUOTE=Canesfan;50095516]Unless I'm missing something, (the 72 hours pushing someone beyond the allowed timeline for an abortion?) this hardly seems like a big deal. In the grand scale of potential "pro-life" legislation possibilities, this seems very minor. I'd even go so far as to say I support it; it's not a decision to make in the heat of the moment.[/QUOTE] It's a big deal for people who don't live near an abortion clinic.

[QUOTE=FunnyStarRunner;50095575]Don't tell me they're gonna do this to make women feel guilty about aborting.[/QUOTE] I never understood this. If the woman feels guilty, then they obviously think what they're doing is possibly wrong. For example, no matter how much people try and explain to me how much I shouldn't eat meat it's not going to make me feel guilty because my convictions tell me that I have nothing to be guilty about. Now, if what they said did make me feel guilty, then it would be clear that, at minimum, I'm not sure what to believe and more information from both sides would be valuable.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50095981]I never understood this. If the woman feels guilty, then they obviously think what they're doing is possibly wrong. For example, no matter how much people try and explain to me how much I shouldn't eat meat it's not going to make me feel guilty because my convictions tell me that I have nothing to be guilty about. Now, if what they said did make me feel guilty, then it would be clear that, at minimum, I'm not sure what to believe.[/QUOTE] You're not likely to get it unless you try really hard to be in their shoes. And I don't think most people can do that. It's hard to empathize with a position that's physically impossible for you to occupy, and an emotional state that's also, physically impossible for you to occupy. Women who have abortions and feel guilty about it are obviously conflicted by what they're doing. They see no good options, and are taking the best one they have even if they don't feel it's an ideal option. Real life is messy and dirty and you often have to make difficult choices or even non choices. For some of these women, there may be situations where they don't like that they're going through this but they know the alternative is worse.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50096003]You're not likely to get it unless you try really hard to be in their shoes. And I don't think most people can do that. It's hard to empathize with a position that's physically impossible for you to occupy, and an emotional state that's also, physically impossible for you to occupy. Women who have abortions and feel guilty about it are obviously conflicted by what they're doing. They see no good options, and are taking the best one they have even if they don't feel it's an ideal option. Real life is messy and dirty and you often have to make difficult choices or even non choices. For some of these women, there may be situations where they don't like that they're going through this but they know the alternative is worse.[/QUOTE] Sure, I understand that, but having more information is never a negative. The ultrasound, for example, only gives information, nothing more. Personally, I think you should know what you're doing when making a choice like that. An uninformed woman might weight the pros and cons differently than an informed woman.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50096026]Sure, I understand that, but having more information is never a negative. The ultrasound, for example, only gives information, nothing more. Personally, I think you should know what you're doing when making a choice like that.[/QUOTE] See, but you're not thinking about the emotional issue for a woman that she has, usually, no choice in participating in. The hormones present during pregnancy change her emotional state wildly. To be forced to see the child in that state is nothing short of strong arming an emotional decision.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50096038]See, but you're not thinking about the emotional issue for a woman that she has, usually, no choice in participating in. The hormones present during pregnancy change her emotional state wildly. To be forced to see the child in that state is nothing short of strong arming an emotional decision.[/QUOTE] Why is that emotion and knowledge not important when making the decision? I mean, there are plenty of emotions also telling the woman that she should have the abortion. It just seems a little paternalistic to say that we shouldn't give a woman objective information because it might cause her to make what you think is the wrong decision.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50096056]Why is that emotion and knowledge not important when making the decision? I mean, there are plenty of emotions also telling the woman that she should have the abortion. It just seems a little paternalistic to say that we shouldn't give a woman objective information because it might cause her to make what you think is the wrong decision.[/QUOTE] Forcing the woman to get the information IS paternalistic. Giving her the option to make her own decisions isn't. You have it very, very backwards here.

It's not that you shouldn't give her an ultrasound, it's that it should be her choice. There is absolutely no reason why the state should force pregnant women to get an ultrasound. [QUOTE=Kljunas;50095950]It's a big deal for people who don't live near an abortion clinic.[/QUOTE] Also this is the real reason. There are two listed abortion clinics in Louisiana right now, so to get an abortion you have to find the time to travel a hundred miles to get to a clinic, get a consultation, travel a hundred miles back home, wait 3 days, and hope you don't have work or school (that you can't blow off) to travel back and get the actual procedure done. There is absolutely no logical reason for a wait time.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50096085]Forcing the woman to get the information IS paternalistic. Giving her the option to make her own decisions isn't. You have it very, very backwards here.[/QUOTE] Would you be for the doctor encouraging an ultrasound in order to get more information before making the decision? Even with that said, I still don't think forcing all the information to out on the table before doing an invasive medical procedure is a bad thing. For example, we shouldn't let a woman take chemo without first being told all the pros and cons. One of the cons associated with an abortion is coming to terms with what you are actually killing. A comparable example might be to have a family member see their dying mother before choosing to pull the plug.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50096101]Would you be for the doctor encouraging an ultrasound in order to get more information before making the decision?[/QUOTE] It depends. I'm not really okay with legislation on doctors, forcing doctors to follow potentially ignorant policy makers laws at the disadvantage of the patient. Too much legislation that focuses on "Encouraging" doctors to do things around abortion, is basically forcing doctors to lie. [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRauXXz6t0Y[/url] Just watch from 8 minutes to about 10 minutes, the section with the doctor himself talking to see what I'm talking about in terms of invasive, and wrong legislation forced upon doctors by ignorant policy makers, like the ones in question in this thread. A woman has a right to that information, but she has a right to decline it as well. Encouragement from a doctor could be too forceful, or it could be, as we see above, incorrect and unhelpful.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50096101]Would you be for the doctor encouraging an ultrasound in order to get more information before making the decision?[/QUOTE] Yes but it shouldn't be legislated. It's a private medical procedure between a woman and her doctor. [QUOTE=sgman91;50096101]Even with that said, I still don't think forcing all the information to out on the table before doing an invasive medical procedure is a bad thing. For example, we shouldn't let a woman take chemo without first being told all the pros and cons. One of the cons associated with an abortion is coming to terms with what you are actually killing.[/QUOTE] What are you actually killing during an abortion? Why must an abortion carry cons? Why do you feel like the state should write legislation to guilt-trip pregnant women? [QUOTE=sgman91;50096101]A comparable example might be to have a family member see their dying mother before choosing to pull the plug.[/QUOTE] Not comparable whatsoever.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50096101]Would you be for the doctor encouraging an ultrasound in order to get more information before making the decision?[/quote] What information could the ultrasound possibly provide that could have any sort of relevance to the mothers decision making process? [quote] Even with that said, I still don't think forcing all the information to out on the table before doing an invasive medical procedure is a bad thing. For example, we shouldn't let a woman take chemo without first being told all the pros and cons. One of the cons associated with an abortion is coming to terms with what you are actually killing.[/quote] You aren't killing anything other then what is essentially a cluster of cells. The only cons if you don't want to have the child is that you're going to have to undergo an invasive medical procedure. [quote] A comparable example might be to have a family member see their dying mother before choosing to pull the plug.[/QUOTE] That's a shitty emotionally loaded comparison. Theres a distinct difference between a dying mother and an underdeveloped fetus. The fetus is not a person, the mother is.

Stupid, stupid motherfuckers.

As a person who actually pulled the plug on my father, it's really not the same. We needed to see him to know he was gone. This is not that.

Pretty fed up with those reactionary morons. It's interesting how the opposition to abortion came about. Some of the most staunch opponents of female body-autonomy only recently (in a historical sense) came to the conclusion that abortion is immoral. For those interested, a primer on the [URL="http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/1982/6/82.06.03.x.html"]history of contraceptives[/URL] will give some perspective. Came across this while doing research for a term paper a while back.

While I disagree with the ultrasound, I don't think the 72 hour wait is too terrible. If you're going to get an abortion, you should at least be able to be sure about it for three days.