Catholic FAQ


Latest Threads
newest posts



Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Social Justice
 

Welcome to Catholic Answers Forums, the largest Catholic Community on the Web.

Here you can join over 400,000 members from around the world discussing all things Catholic. Membership is open to all, Catholic and non-Catholic alike, who seek the Truth with Charity.

To gain full access, you must register for a FREE account. Registered members are able to:
  • Submit questions about the faith to experts from Catholic Answers
  • Participate in all forum discussions
  • Communicate privately with Catholics from around the world
  • Plus join a prayer group, read with the Book Club, and much more.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. So join our community today!

Have a question about registration or your account log-in? Just contact our Support Hotline.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search Thread Display
  #31  
Old Feb 20, '12, 5:18 am
Dan McVay Dan McVay is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: February 10, 2012
Posts: 138
Religion: Undecided
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeoSalvatoreMeo View Post
If anything, it is an abortion that is comparable to rape. Abortion is an act of violence, both against the baby and her mother. Abortion is painful, bloody, and involves sharp instruments, certainly much more comparable to forcible rape than an innocuous ultrasound probe"

The full response is here: http://www.jillstanek.com/2012/02/ab...ion-with-rape/
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.

Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:38 am.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old Feb 20, '12, 5:28 am
JharekCarnelian's Avatar
JharekCarnelian JharekCarnelian is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Posts: 22,188
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Difference = choice
Indeed, murder does involve a conscious choice.

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:39 am.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old Feb 20, '12, 5:29 am
JharekCarnelian's Avatar
JharekCarnelian JharekCarnelian is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Posts: 22,188
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.

Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?
What is your agenda Dan? It is plain from your posts you have one, yet you keep shadow boxing and dancing around the edges of what you actually have to say...

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:39 am.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old Feb 20, '12, 5:35 am
JharekCarnelian's Avatar
JharekCarnelian JharekCarnelian is offline
Forum Elder
 
Join Date: April 14, 2008
Posts: 22,188
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Personanongrata View Post
And she can choose C - leave the state and obtain an abortion without the ultrasound and all of the above chaos.
And if she is Catholic or Orthodox thus excommunicate herself. Although as pointed out given the way abortion is presented as a procedure whereby an undeveloped set of cells is removed from the body rather than a human being a certain ammount of the blame rests on the prevaliing culture we reside in which sets up that paradigm and passes it on to both women and men.

If you talk of chaos, one would hav to speculate that many pocedures used during abortion whereby human lives are ended in a partcularly unpleasant fashion would most certainly be far more evocative of the idea of chaos. Of course 'abortion tourism' is a pressing problem in my own country, but that is no reason we should legalise abortion, although it is often presented to us as a reason we should.

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:40 am.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old Feb 20, '12, 6:21 am
Mary Gail 36's Avatar
Mary Gail 36 Mary Gail 36 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: September 5, 2005
Posts: 11,269
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.

Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?
A "doctor" who performs an abortion without conducting an ultrasound would legally be committing malpractice.
All that rhetoric about abortion being "safe" ---the "doctor" would know what procedure to use just blindly?

Basically you are arguing for a less "safe" procedure so the woman can blindly "choose".

It isn't even a prohibition of abortion.

If abortion were really just a benign procedure, why worry about what the women see?
__________________
Jesus, protect and save the unborn.

The Word became flesh, He lived among us, and we saw His glory, the glory that He has from the Father as only Son of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:40 am.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old Feb 20, '12, 6:32 am
St Francis St Francis is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: August 11, 2004
Posts: 10,549
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.

Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?
You have not yet pointed out where a transvaginal ultrasound would be required. Few of the ultrasounds would actually have to be transvaginal; most would be transabdominal.
__________________


"The Church is intolerant in principle because she believes; she is tolerant in practice because she loves. The enemies of the Church are tolerant in principle because they do not believe; they are intolerant in practice because they do not love."
-Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange O.P




Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:40 am.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old Feb 20, '12, 6:34 am
Corki's Avatar
Corki Corki is offline
Forum Master
 
Join Date: November 22, 2005
Posts: 13,631
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.
This is not at all unusual in medical care. There are hundreds of additional steps that are taken before and after medical procedures that a given doctor might think are superfluous but they are required by the government, the insurance provider or the medical facility itself. Why the objection to this one?

Seeing the ultrasound is simply an attempt to ensure informed consent. Many patients for medical care and surgery, don't want to hear about all the possible side-effects or risks. That doesn't change the fact that they are required to be informed.

For decades, abortion providers have fought all attempts to provide basic information to their clients and to ensure that abortions are conducted with informed consent. They want abortion to be seen as a normal medical procedure but they have been unwilling to implement basic "normal" standards of safety and consent. Now, they are seeing the consequences of that pro-abortion agenda.

Quote:
Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?
Catholics are arguing for freedom to use religious conscience in providing health care.

Are you saying that these "doctors" have a religious objection to ultrasounds?
__________________
“Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.” Saint John Paul II

"It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life." Pope Francis

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:41 am.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old Feb 20, '12, 7:19 am
maryjk maryjk is offline
Prayer Warrior
 
Join Date: July 4, 2005
Posts: 9,028
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.

Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?
And when she chooses and consents to an abortion, she receives a pelvic exam. Having just had a transvaginal ultrasound, I can tell you that the pelvic exam was much more invasive; much more intrusive.

Catholics are arguing for freedom of conscience in medical care. Whose conscience is being tramped?
__________________
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher

Making good people helpless, won't make bad people harmless.

Last edited by Matilda Bennett; Feb 20, '12 at 10:41 am.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old Feb 20, '12, 5:58 pm
Linda Marie's Avatar
Linda Marie Linda Marie is offline
Regular Member
Forum Supporter
 
Join Date: May 18, 2005
Posts: 2,330
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Chemical Abortions
Quote:
Methotrexate has been available for almost 50 years as a treatment for tumors, arthritis, and psoriasis. It is given by injection. Normal side effects are described as "usually mild" and not of long duration; they can include: nausea, diarrhea, abdominal cramping, hot flashes, or sores in the mouth. The medication stops the development of the embryo.

Misoprostol is a commonly used prostaglandin medication for ulcers. It is inserted into the vagina, often by the woman at home, 5 to 7 days after the injection of methotrexate. A number of side-effects are possible, including nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain, dizziness, and/or fever and chills.
<...>
One complication of this procedure is that it is only about 95% reliable; the embryo is sometimes not expelled, but continues to grow. Because of the nature of the medication used, it will be almost certainly seriously deformed. Before proceeding with a medical abortion,the woman should be willing to follow up with a surgical abortion if the chemical technique fails.
<...>
Disadvantages include:
  • At least two visits to a physician are required (vs. one for an abortion by vacuum aspiration)
  • The medication is only about 95% effective.
  • The duration of the procedure and its related bleeding are greater.
  • The woman may be distressed at seeing the expelled embryo.
This site also reckons that the baby at 2 weeks is just 'a small piece of undifferentiated tissue'. If the baby is just a small piece of undifferentiated tissue, how will the mother recognise the embryo to be distressed at seeing his/her dead body. Abortionists argue that whatever you do, don't let her see what she is killing.

From the bill:
Summary:
Quote:
Abortion; informed consent. Requires that, as a component of informed consent to an abortion, to determine gestation age, every pregnant female shall undergo ultrasound imaging and be given an opportunity to view the ultrasound image of her fetus prior to the abortion. The medical professional performing the ultrasound must obtain written certification from the woman that the opportunity was offered and whether the woman availed herself of the opportunity to see the ultrasound image or hear the fetal heartbeat. A copy of the ultrasound and the written certification shall be maintained in the woman's medical records at the facility where the abortion is to be performed.

SENATE BILL NO. 484

Quote:
4. A statement of the probable gestational age of the fetus at the time the abortion is to be performed and that fetal ultrasound imaging shall be performed prior to the abortion to confirm the gestational age; and
Where does it specify transvaginal ultrasound?

A woman should know exactly to what she is consenting before she has her child killed, whether by chemicals or surgery.

This whole argument is a beat up.
__________________

Tiber Swim Team
Class of 1980

Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old Feb 21, '12, 7:23 am
Jeremiah1278 Jeremiah1278 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2011
Posts: 127
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan McVay View Post
Except a woman chooses and consents to an abortion. The new legislation would force a procedure even if the doctor finds it is unnecessary and the woman does not want it.

Where are all the Catholics who have been arguing for freedom in medical care?
Dan, I'm pro-life, and I agree with you: I don't think state legislatures have much business telling doctors which tests or procedures are necessary. Legislators usually are unable to brainstorm scenarios where you don't want the doctor to be doing X, even though you have mandated her to do so.

Laws regarding informed consent are already well-developed over the past 50 years. I don't think this legislation does much other than make some legislators get re-elected. They aren't stopping any abortions, and I'm guessing they aren't radically increasing the number of sonographic tests that will be performed. I mean... before performing an abortion, how else are these doctors confirming that the woman is actually pregnant? Maybe I'm woefully uninformed, but I think the cheapest, easiest, quickest way is a sonogram. So I'm assuming they are doing them all the time before handing out an abortion pill.

Last edited by Jeremiah1278; Feb 21, '12 at 7:25 am. Reason: Someone already posted the text of the bill above me in the thread
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old Feb 21, '12, 8:01 am
Nate13 Nate13 is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: July 9, 2011
Posts: 2,955
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremiah1278 View Post
Dan, I'm pro-life, and I agree with you: I don't think state legislatures have much business telling doctors which tests or procedures are necessary. Legislators usually are unable to brainstorm scenarios where you don't want the doctor to be doing X, even though you have mandated her to do so.

Laws regarding informed consent are already well-developed over the past 50 years. I don't think this legislation does much other than make some legislators get re-elected. They aren't stopping any abortions, and I'm guessing they aren't radically increasing the number of sonographic tests that will be performed. I mean... before performing an abortion, how else are these doctors confirming that the woman is actually pregnant? Maybe I'm woefully uninformed, but I think the cheapest, easiest, quickest way is a sonogram. So I'm assuming they are doing them all the time before handing out an abortion pill.
Do you not believe a woman seeing her baby has a great effect? Its of course possible that most women will reject the option to see their baby even though it is offered, but its important to make sure women at least have a chance to receive the information. This is about protecting women from abortion centers and the biased influence they have over the decision process.
__________________
“We are all born with the power of speech, but we need grammar. Conscience, too, needs Revelation.”
― Fulton J. Sheen
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old Feb 21, '12, 8:43 am
Jeremiah1278 Jeremiah1278 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2011
Posts: 127
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nate13 View Post
Do you not believe a woman seeing her baby has a great effect? Its of course possible that most women will reject the option to see their baby even though it is offered, but its important to make sure women at least have a chance to receive the information. This is about protecting women from abortion centers and the biased influence they have over the decision process.
To answer your first question: I don't think a woman seeing the fetus has a great effect on preventing abortions. One University is releasing a study this year showing that forced viewing of ultrasound images seldom changes the mind of the mother.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/0...ned-abortions/

To address your second point: I understand that it's about protecting women from biased influence. But if a reasonable person concludes (and I think (s)he probably does) that conducting an ultrasound is a required part of obtaining informed consent, then you don't need a special law. You just sue those doctors who don't obtain informed consent. Those laws are already developed.

There are two things that drive health care providers to do the ultrasounds:

(1) To confirm there's a pregnancy. Conducting an abortion is probably medical malpractice if you don't confirm there's a pregnancy. That's going to get you all the ultrasounds, I'm guessing.

(2) Most mothers want to see the ultrasound anyway (that's what I'm reading). That's going to get most women to take a peek at the screen while the doctor/technician is working.

This law is based perhaps on a false premise that women have abortions because they aren't aware that the fetus is a tiny little human. "If we show them that it's a baby, then they won't do it!" It's a nice thought, but sadly it doesn't seem to work like that.

So, given that the law solves very little and tries to supplant the doctor's medical discretion with the medical discretion of state legislators (probably former attorneys and businessmen), I don't think these laws are wise. I'm almost always against the state regulating what is the standard of care. I prefer to have other medical experts in the field define that standard.

Better to attack abortion straight on.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old Feb 21, '12, 9:10 am
TheRealJuliane TheRealJuliane is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 2010
Posts: 19,026
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by DeoSalvatoreMeo View Post
As has already been stated, abortionists use transvaginal ultrasounds to confirm a pregnancy and assess how far into the pregnancy the woman is. The only difference is the direction in which the monitor will be pointed.

You can read about transvaginal ultrasound from this "Provider's Guide to Medical Abortion" here:

http://www.prochoice.org/education/c...trasound.asp#3

Jill Stanek's responded to the "controversy" on her website:

"Furthermore, do abortion proponents really want to “go there” on the topic of vaginal intrusion and rape?

If anything, it is an abortion that is comparable to rape. Abortion is an act of violence, both against the baby and her mother. Abortion is painful, bloody, and involves sharp instruments, certainly much more comparable to forcible rape than an innocuous ultrasound probe"

The full response is here: http://www.jillstanek.com/2012/02/ab...ion-with-rape/
No, they really don't use transvaginal US very often. So your argument falls apart based on faulty information. I wonder if you understand what an ultrasound even is. Having had several, all that is necessary is a wand placed over one's abdomen. Well, that and some gooey stuff which is always cold.

and you never answered me: How does giving birth to a baby involve anything penetrating?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old Feb 21, '12, 9:15 am
TheRealJuliane TheRealJuliane is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 11, 2010
Posts: 19,026
Religion: Roman Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremiah1278 View Post
To answer your first question: I don't think a woman seeing the fetus has a great effect on preventing abortions. One University is releasing a study this year showing that forced viewing of ultrasound images seldom changes the mind of the mother.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/0...ned-abortions/

To address your second point: I understand that it's about protecting women from biased influence. But if a reasonable person concludes (and I think (s)he probably does) that conducting an ultrasound is a required part of obtaining informed consent, then you don't need a special law. You just sue those doctors who don't obtain informed consent. Those laws are already developed.

There are two things that drive health care providers to do the ultrasounds:

(1) To confirm there's a pregnancy. Conducting an abortion is probably medical malpractice if you don't confirm there's a pregnancy. That's going to get you all the ultrasounds, I'm guessing.

(2) Most mothers want to see the ultrasound anyway (that's what I'm reading). That's going to get most women to take a peek at the screen while the doctor/technician is working.

This law is based perhaps on a false premise that women have abortions because they aren't aware that the fetus is a tiny little human. "If we show them that it's a baby, then they won't do it!" It's a nice thought, but sadly it doesn't seem to work like that.

So, given that the law solves very little and tries to supplant the doctor's medical discretion with the medical discretion of state legislators (probably former attorneys and businessmen), I don't think these laws are wise. I'm almost always against the state regulating what is the standard of care. I prefer to have other medical experts in the field define that standard.

Better to attack abortion straight on.
You can't "peek at the screen" if it's turned away from you, which is what abortionists currently do when assessing the baby's age.

The section I bolded goes directly against experience. Come to the mobile pregnancy clinic parked outside Planned Parenthood and watch an abortion-minded woman change her mind as she sees her baby in color 4D on a screen right next to her. It works nearly every time.

Last edited by TheRealJuliane; Feb 21, '12 at 9:32 am.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old Feb 21, '12, 9:19 am
Corki's Avatar
Corki Corki is offline
Forum Master
 
Join Date: November 22, 2005
Posts: 13,631
Religion: Catholic
Default Re: Is it okay to force a woman to have an ultrasound...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremiah1278 View Post
To address your second point: I understand that it's about protecting women from biased influence. But if a reasonable person concludes (and I think (s)he probably does) that conducting an ultrasound is a required part of obtaining informed consent, then you don't need a special law. You just sue those doctors who don't obtain informed consent. Those laws are already developed.
That would make sense to reasonable people. Unfortunately, the pro-abortion lobby is far from reasonable. In my opinion, they brought this on themselves. I am not sure about the state in the OP but in Texas, abortion providers exempted themselves from informed consent laws that were aimed at other medical procedures and claimed that the IC laws did not apply to abortions. This included informatio about risks and alternatives. The only consent they ever sought was a "yes" to an abortion. It was only by passing specific consent laws (including ultrasound) that the abortion providers have been held accountable for informed consent.

Quote:
There are two things that drive health care providers to do the ultrasounds:

(1) To confirm there's a pregnancy. Conducting an abortion is probably medical malpractice if you don't confirm there's a pregnancy. That's going to get you all the ultrasounds, I'm guessing.

(2) Most mothers want to see the ultrasound anyway (that's what I'm reading). That's going to get most women to take a peek at the screen while the doctor/technician is working.
While those are two valid reasons for a doctor to do an ultrasound, the most common reason is to accurately date the pregnancy. This information is critical when any other procedure is being considered. This information is also VERY important if an abortion is being considered. Not only are certain types of abortion depended on gestational age but there are state laws that regulate abortions differently depending on gestational age.

The fact that abortionists do not already attempt to accurately date a pregnancy before terminating it is another problem altogether.

As has been pointed out earlier, an accurate gestational age is especially important when a chemical abortion is the goal. When a D&C type abortion is planned, there are other medical concerns that should be ruled out and ultrasound is a good way to do that. I ran into this myself when I had a D&C scheduled for an incomplete miscarriage (baby had died but not naturally expelled). There is no way they would have done the D&C without an ultrasound first (and they ended up not doing the D&C based on what they found) but abortionists routinely skip that important step.


Quote:
This law is based perhaps on a false premise that women have abortions because they aren't aware that the fetus is a tiny little human. "If we show them that it's a baby, then they won't do it!" It's a nice thought, but sadly it doesn't seem to work like that.
I am sure that goes into it. It is not entirely faulty since there is considerable evidence that many women who are referred to pro-life pregnancy resource centers for an ultrasound change their minds about abortions. It may not be the majority but it is a significant number.

However, a bigger (and non-religious) reason to support this law is that it forces abortionists to provide a standard of care that they have skirted for too long.
__________________
“Above all, the common outcry, which is justly made on behalf of human rights -- for example, the right to health, to home, to work, to family, to culture -- is false and illusory if the right to life, the most basic and fundamental right and the condition for all other personal rights, is not defended with maximum determination.” Saint John Paul II

"It is not “progressive” to try to resolve problems by eliminating a human life." Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   Catholic Answers Forums > Forums > Apologetics > Social Justice

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search Thread
Search Thread:

Advanced Search
Display

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Prayer Intentions

Most Active Groups
8255Meet and talk,talk talk
Last by: janiejnb
5018CAF Prayer Warriors Support Group
Last by: UpUpAndAway
4345Devotion to the Sorrowful Mother
Last by: lsbar
4029OCD/Scrupulosity Group
Last by: B79
3833SOLITUDE
Last by: tuscany
3567Let's empty Purgatory
Last by: RJB
3226Poems and Reflections
Last by: PathWalker
3203Catholic Vegetarians & Vegans
Last by: memphian
3121Petitions Before the Blessed Sacrament
Last by: grateful_child
3048For seniors and shut- ins
Last by: tammany



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:14 pm.

Home RSS Feeds - Home - Archive - Top

Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.