The whole idea of criminalizing intent has a broader legal context. To what extent can you criminalize intent anywhere else? Consider that these people want to make abortion a capital crime, a crime of murder. And of course, the claim that abortion is murder is the foundation of opposition to abortion. But in murder, intent has nothing to do with it. Only if it is materially proven by evidence of deed that you were not defending yourself, you are innocent of murder.
I’ve been wondering about the legal aspects you bring up and meaning to look into it. Something else I’ve been thinking about regarding intent is, who is to say what one’s intent is? Anti abortion rights advocates say in an “abortion” the intent is to “murder”… but what if someone’s intent is simply to not be pregnant, and based on viability a secondary outcome is that there is no live birth?
And I don’t see how the intent is actually different in “good” vs “bad” abortions. In the wsj article mentioned, the author says that intent in managing PPROMS is to “balance the needs of the mother and baby” when performing an induction on a mid 2nd trimester pregnancy that does not end in a live birth (because viability), and thus it’s not an abortion. But, that induction does still meet the two conditions generally agreed upon (from definitions and medical groups I see with a quick search) to define an abortion: intervention with the intent to end an intrauterine pregnancy and the intervention does not end in a live birth. They may have additional specific intentions and wishes, but at the core, there is an intervention and it is intended to end the pregnancy (and as such generally ends associated physical conditions or risks associated with the pregnancy) and it does not result in a live birth.
How does “intent” work in any repeatable, realistic way in the legal field?
I was speaking to a physician friend of mine recently about why other doctors, and the medical profession writ large, including state medical societies and national board certification groups, are not coming to the defense of OBGYNs in the face of laws criminalizing the practice of medicine. I asked him if they thought, and why they thought, that the criminalization of medicine would stop with abortion, and never reach, say, an oncologist? He had an interesting theory—that folks who have never personally or as a group experienced discrimination (we are both Jewish) are less attuned to the “when they came for group x, I did not speak up for I was not a member of group x, and so on, for groups a-z, until when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me” than are folks who have experienced discrimination. I would love to see more in this substack about the AWOL-ness of the medical profession when it comes to laws that dictate practices contrary to medical ethics or that criminalize the practice of medicine.
I just can’t with the disingenuousness from the anti-abortion folks about language. They love having it both ways. Out loud: “It’s an intent!” As policy: “we’re banning medications and procedures!” I still want to find a way to force them to acknowledge that they are banning miscarriage procedures. Because “maternal-fetal separation” doesn’t mean anything if you’re still not allowing the standard of care (D&Cs and D&Es and mife/miso) when someone miscarries. Like everything right now - we need to fight for a mainstream media discourse on *specific details*.
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) has ruled that El Salvador violated the human rights of a Salvadoran woman who was denied an abortion despite her high-risk pregnancy in 2013.
Well, good. It's about time. El Salvador has been problematic for some years now, what with women being put in prison, sometimes for decades, for miscarriages (and prosecuted for abortions.)
These forced birther fanatics are dangerous. They are ignorant and don't understand the necessity of complete reproductive care being available to all. The motive for obtaining that is none of their fucking business. They just want women to be nothing but walking incubators.
Before unsubscribing, I wanted to insure you, that I will continue to listen to and work with my Democratic Missouri State Representative, Stephanie Hein, to insure that your concerns are addressed. However, having followed you and rereading this article, I cannot find anything to agree with and base a dialogue upon. Your reference to a booklet which states that "fetuses feel pain" and that they are a "separate, unique, living human being" is "bullshit" is a clear indication that you have no respect for my views and no desire to know the truth. And even though I want to be informed, I don't need your clear bias. Is anything "off-limits?" Is it OK to sell fetus' "body-parts" and to lie about it?
Your 'beliefs' are not based on any kind of reality.
Okay, you've been the victim of propaganda so, I'm not sure why you subscribed. First of all she is correct, the nervous system which consists of the sensory nerves, that transmit pain are developed very late in the second trimester here is a medical scientifically reviewed article explaining it.
"Facts are important, especially when it comes to policies and discussions that impact patients. Here are the scientific facts concerning gestational development and capacity for pain.
The science conclusively establishes that a human fetus does not have the capacity to experience pain until after at least 24–25 weeks. Every major medical organization that has examined this issue and peer-reviewed studies on the matter have consistently reached the conclusion that abortion before this point does not result in the perception of pain in a fetus.i, ii, iii, iv, v
Rigorous scientific studies have found that the connections necessary to transmit signals from peripheral sensory nerves to the brain, as well as the brain structures necessary to process those signals, do not develop until at or after 24 weeks of gestation.vi Because it lacks these connections and structures, a fetus or embryo does not have the physiological capacity to perceive pain until at least this gestational age."
First, you left out BY FAR the most important part -- that the fetus is a "separate [albeit "dependent"] unique, LIVING Human Being" whose life is "aborted." Second, does the fetus resist the abortion? Haven't you seen the actual films? How about the testimony of the "abortion doctor" who "quit" after hearing the babies' scream when the amniotic sac broke? Or, what about those who have survived an abortion? Third, a "sting" is by nature "deceptive." If you are saying that "Planned Parenthood" and others has NEVER offered or sold fetal tissues and body parts, I don't believe you.
It is essentially a parasite as it cannot live outside it’s host, prior to the 23-24 week stage. And even then only with great extensive technology that was never available in the say the 60’s.
Yeah you are being fed propanda, I have worked in the operating room and done many surgical procedures, and I can tell you that simply does not happen. The lungs are the last to develop, that’s why so many premies don’t make it because the lungs don’t develop enough to sustain life. You need air to scream. You are being lied to and I’d be pissed if jerks were lying to me. But you do you.
I was going from memory as I have been following this Controversy for over 50 years. But you can also Google Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who co-founded what is now know as NARAL, before he changed his mind and produced the Film, "The Silent Scream."
In my opinion, calling a human being a "parasite" is immoral and referring to the mother as "it's host" should also be considered offensive.
Oh, boy, are you misinformed. What “films?” Are you telling me they put a camera inside a woman’s uterus to film a fetus? I miscarried TWICE at 12 weeks, and I can assure you that what ended up in the pad I was wearing looked just like a particularly clotty period. There was no identifiable “fetal tissue” in there. Nothing to film or see or sell. In a live birth, have you ever heard any sound from the about-to-be-born baby, much less a scream? I also give birth to 2 children, and I can assure you there was no sound from inside the uterus. What is an “abortion doctor?” I am not aware of any board certification for this non-existent specialty. I vaguely remember the “sting,” and from what I could tell, the supposedly incriminating information was manipulated to look like something it was not and to support the filmmakers’ narrative. And why are you people always so focused on the minuscule percentage of abortions that take place after 21 weeks, always due to some medical condition that is devastating to the health or life of the pregnant person and/or the fetus? You always act like women do these things on a whim. Au contraire, they are tragic situations and are recognized by all concerned as such.
I agree with you that all abortions are tragic situations and that very few are necessary to save the life of the mother. But that can never justify the over one Billion abortions worldwide. ONLY GOD KNOWS peoples motives and will hold them responsible for their actions.
That “albeit ‘dependent’” is doing a lot of heavy lifting that shouldn’t be relegated to a parenthetical aside. Do you care about women’s lives? Do you care about maternal mortality? Do you truly know all that can happen to a woman’s (or girl’s) body in a pregnancy? This isn’t theoretical for us. And you clearly don’t understand that.
Nor will he ever will. There are men who respect women’s lives and their pregnancy journey. Then there are boys who have limited immature views and values. The male child needs to go back to mommy.
"albeit dependent" was parenthetical because it was not in the original quote, but I felt it needed to be acknowledged. If you have followed my comments in the last couple of months on this substack, you would know that I do indeed "care" about ALL sides of this very sensitive and important Subject. And that is exactly why I was trying to understand every point of view. As a man, I have observed, but not experienced pregnancy directly. However, one of my daughters, who is a Doctor, has two children and they are expecting their third. She keeps me "straight."
Yeah, I mean I literally went to school for years, worked for twenty years in reproductive health doing reproductive surgeries, but this hysterical propaganda victim doesn’t want the truth, he prefers the lies they tell him. He’s hopeless.
I'm so proud of all of us fighting here in MO! We're not done yet! Check out Action Abortion MO and donate, volunteer, etc! Anything helps! If you're in the area and want to join a meeting, head to their website, Instagram, etc to see what's up! Let's do this
God, I hate those fucking idiots. When I was escorting at my local clinic they all swarmed an a delivery truck screaming "that's where they they take your baby away." I pointed out the guy was making a delivery, not a pick up. I think they are manipulating the borderline cognitively-impaired.
I remember similar scenes--in the 1980s. In Oakland and San Francisco. I escorted at both locations, as well as in southern California for a while, til I realized that I can't keep my cool around that crap, and was doing more harm than good. Almost as bad for me were the drone of praying, and the clerical collars leading the whole thing. I'm sure I'm not the only person who is still permanently traumatized by religion, and being around these assholes just makes it worse. Good for you for sticking it out!
The whole idea of criminalizing intent has a broader legal context. To what extent can you criminalize intent anywhere else? Consider that these people want to make abortion a capital crime, a crime of murder. And of course, the claim that abortion is murder is the foundation of opposition to abortion. But in murder, intent has nothing to do with it. Only if it is materially proven by evidence of deed that you were not defending yourself, you are innocent of murder.
I’ve been wondering about the legal aspects you bring up and meaning to look into it. Something else I’ve been thinking about regarding intent is, who is to say what one’s intent is? Anti abortion rights advocates say in an “abortion” the intent is to “murder”… but what if someone’s intent is simply to not be pregnant, and based on viability a secondary outcome is that there is no live birth?
And I don’t see how the intent is actually different in “good” vs “bad” abortions. In the wsj article mentioned, the author says that intent in managing PPROMS is to “balance the needs of the mother and baby” when performing an induction on a mid 2nd trimester pregnancy that does not end in a live birth (because viability), and thus it’s not an abortion. But, that induction does still meet the two conditions generally agreed upon (from definitions and medical groups I see with a quick search) to define an abortion: intervention with the intent to end an intrauterine pregnancy and the intervention does not end in a live birth. They may have additional specific intentions and wishes, but at the core, there is an intervention and it is intended to end the pregnancy (and as such generally ends associated physical conditions or risks associated with the pregnancy) and it does not result in a live birth.
How does “intent” work in any repeatable, realistic way in the legal field?
I was speaking to a physician friend of mine recently about why other doctors, and the medical profession writ large, including state medical societies and national board certification groups, are not coming to the defense of OBGYNs in the face of laws criminalizing the practice of medicine. I asked him if they thought, and why they thought, that the criminalization of medicine would stop with abortion, and never reach, say, an oncologist? He had an interesting theory—that folks who have never personally or as a group experienced discrimination (we are both Jewish) are less attuned to the “when they came for group x, I did not speak up for I was not a member of group x, and so on, for groups a-z, until when they came for me, there was no one left to speak up for me” than are folks who have experienced discrimination. I would love to see more in this substack about the AWOL-ness of the medical profession when it comes to laws that dictate practices contrary to medical ethics or that criminalize the practice of medicine.
I just can’t with the disingenuousness from the anti-abortion folks about language. They love having it both ways. Out loud: “It’s an intent!” As policy: “we’re banning medications and procedures!” I still want to find a way to force them to acknowledge that they are banning miscarriage procedures. Because “maternal-fetal separation” doesn’t mean anything if you’re still not allowing the standard of care (D&Cs and D&Es and mife/miso) when someone miscarries. Like everything right now - we need to fight for a mainstream media discourse on *specific details*.
You may have seen this already - but in case you haven't: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/20/el-salvador-abortion-death-ruling
The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACHR) has ruled that El Salvador violated the human rights of a Salvadoran woman who was denied an abortion despite her high-risk pregnancy in 2013.
Well, good. It's about time. El Salvador has been problematic for some years now, what with women being put in prison, sometimes for decades, for miscarriages (and prosecuted for abortions.)
These forced birther fanatics are dangerous. They are ignorant and don't understand the necessity of complete reproductive care being available to all. The motive for obtaining that is none of their fucking business. They just want women to be nothing but walking incubators.
Before unsubscribing, I wanted to insure you, that I will continue to listen to and work with my Democratic Missouri State Representative, Stephanie Hein, to insure that your concerns are addressed. However, having followed you and rereading this article, I cannot find anything to agree with and base a dialogue upon. Your reference to a booklet which states that "fetuses feel pain" and that they are a "separate, unique, living human being" is "bullshit" is a clear indication that you have no respect for my views and no desire to know the truth. And even though I want to be informed, I don't need your clear bias. Is anything "off-limits?" Is it OK to sell fetus' "body-parts" and to lie about it?
Troll
Your 'beliefs' are not based on any kind of reality.
Okay, you've been the victim of propaganda so, I'm not sure why you subscribed. First of all she is correct, the nervous system which consists of the sensory nerves, that transmit pain are developed very late in the second trimester here is a medical scientifically reviewed article explaining it.
"Facts are important, especially when it comes to policies and discussions that impact patients. Here are the scientific facts concerning gestational development and capacity for pain.
The science conclusively establishes that a human fetus does not have the capacity to experience pain until after at least 24–25 weeks. Every major medical organization that has examined this issue and peer-reviewed studies on the matter have consistently reached the conclusion that abortion before this point does not result in the perception of pain in a fetus.i, ii, iii, iv, v
Rigorous scientific studies have found that the connections necessary to transmit signals from peripheral sensory nerves to the brain, as well as the brain structures necessary to process those signals, do not develop until at or after 24 weeks of gestation.vi Because it lacks these connections and structures, a fetus or embryo does not have the physiological capacity to perceive pain until at least this gestational age."
https://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/gestational-development-capacity-for-pain
Second did you miss where the asshole who falsified the Planned Parenthood "sting" admitted he spliced parts of his video so it said those things? https://oversightdemocrats.house.gov/planned-parenthood-fact-v-fiction
A home run 👍
First, you left out BY FAR the most important part -- that the fetus is a "separate [albeit "dependent"] unique, LIVING Human Being" whose life is "aborted." Second, does the fetus resist the abortion? Haven't you seen the actual films? How about the testimony of the "abortion doctor" who "quit" after hearing the babies' scream when the amniotic sac broke? Or, what about those who have survived an abortion? Third, a "sting" is by nature "deceptive." If you are saying that "Planned Parenthood" and others has NEVER offered or sold fetal tissues and body parts, I don't believe you.
It is essentially a parasite as it cannot live outside it’s host, prior to the 23-24 week stage. And even then only with great extensive technology that was never available in the say the 60’s.
Yeah you are being fed propanda, I have worked in the operating room and done many surgical procedures, and I can tell you that simply does not happen. The lungs are the last to develop, that’s why so many premies don’t make it because the lungs don’t develop enough to sustain life. You need air to scream. You are being lied to and I’d be pissed if jerks were lying to me. But you do you.
Thank you for expertise and knowledge. It amazes me when trolls 🧌 get here and finally can’t take the truth anymore and word vomit. 🤮
I was going from memory as I have been following this Controversy for over 50 years. But you can also Google Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who co-founded what is now know as NARAL, before he changed his mind and produced the Film, "The Silent Scream."
In my opinion, calling a human being a "parasite" is immoral and referring to the mother as "it's host" should also be considered offensive.
Oh, boy, are you misinformed. What “films?” Are you telling me they put a camera inside a woman’s uterus to film a fetus? I miscarried TWICE at 12 weeks, and I can assure you that what ended up in the pad I was wearing looked just like a particularly clotty period. There was no identifiable “fetal tissue” in there. Nothing to film or see or sell. In a live birth, have you ever heard any sound from the about-to-be-born baby, much less a scream? I also give birth to 2 children, and I can assure you there was no sound from inside the uterus. What is an “abortion doctor?” I am not aware of any board certification for this non-existent specialty. I vaguely remember the “sting,” and from what I could tell, the supposedly incriminating information was manipulated to look like something it was not and to support the filmmakers’ narrative. And why are you people always so focused on the minuscule percentage of abortions that take place after 21 weeks, always due to some medical condition that is devastating to the health or life of the pregnant person and/or the fetus? You always act like women do these things on a whim. Au contraire, they are tragic situations and are recognized by all concerned as such.
Thank you for your advocacy ❤️❣️❤️
I agree with you that all abortions are tragic situations and that very few are necessary to save the life of the mother. But that can never justify the over one Billion abortions worldwide. ONLY GOD KNOWS peoples motives and will hold them responsible for their actions.
That “albeit ‘dependent’” is doing a lot of heavy lifting that shouldn’t be relegated to a parenthetical aside. Do you care about women’s lives? Do you care about maternal mortality? Do you truly know all that can happen to a woman’s (or girl’s) body in a pregnancy? This isn’t theoretical for us. And you clearly don’t understand that.
Nor will he ever will. There are men who respect women’s lives and their pregnancy journey. Then there are boys who have limited immature views and values. The male child needs to go back to mommy.
His propaganda is so much more important to him than any actual facts, he prefers ignorance and cruelty.
"albeit dependent" was parenthetical because it was not in the original quote, but I felt it needed to be acknowledged. If you have followed my comments in the last couple of months on this substack, you would know that I do indeed "care" about ALL sides of this very sensitive and important Subject. And that is exactly why I was trying to understand every point of view. As a man, I have observed, but not experienced pregnancy directly. However, one of my daughters, who is a Doctor, has two children and they are expecting their third. She keeps me "straight."
You clearly can’t accept facts or reality. I feel sorry for you.
Yeah, I mean I literally went to school for years, worked for twenty years in reproductive health doing reproductive surgeries, but this hysterical propaganda victim doesn’t want the truth, he prefers the lies they tell him. He’s hopeless.
Couldn’t take the truth. Well said and the troll 🧌 clearly not open minded.
Exactly what "facts" have I not accepted?
Stay ignorant. We don’t have time for your silliness.
Troll 🧌😂
Name-calling is used by those who don't have any answer.
I'm so proud of all of us fighting here in MO! We're not done yet! Check out Action Abortion MO and donate, volunteer, etc! Anything helps! If you're in the area and want to join a meeting, head to their website, Instagram, etc to see what's up! Let's do this
Screaming "Don't kill your baby", shoving your face within inches of a woman's face isn't counting. It's intimidation and harassment.
God, I hate those fucking idiots. When I was escorting at my local clinic they all swarmed an a delivery truck screaming "that's where they they take your baby away." I pointed out the guy was making a delivery, not a pick up. I think they are manipulating the borderline cognitively-impaired.
I remember similar scenes--in the 1980s. In Oakland and San Francisco. I escorted at both locations, as well as in southern California for a while, til I realized that I can't keep my cool around that crap, and was doing more harm than good. Almost as bad for me were the drone of praying, and the clerical collars leading the whole thing. I'm sure I'm not the only person who is still permanently traumatized by religion, and being around these assholes just makes it worse. Good for you for sticking it out!