What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

Published

Something to understand what nurses think about re the Current News and their opinions!

4 hours ago, heron said:

There’s also potential for the moon to break up and rain down on our heads, but is it likely?

Actually,  I'm unaware of the potential of the moon to fall on our heads.  Please share.

Why are you so sure on demand abortions wouldn't happen?  Do you have something, anything, to back that up?

4 hours ago, heron said:

If y’all were serious about preventing abortion, you would be campaigning for reality-based sex education and easy access to effective contraception. 

I agree on the education part.  Effective contraception is already available.

4 hours ago, heron said:

Resurrecting all these lies, distortions and tired rhetorical tricks are a waste of time. If a person opposes abortion, then they shouldn’t have one … or they could stop having heterosexual sex.

Not sure of what lies and distortions you're speaking of.  

4 hours ago, heron said:

Come to think of it, if legal abortion was such an abomination, why has the rate of abortions gone down since Roe v. Wade was handed down fifty years ago?

Could be lots of reasons.   Possibly not related.  Why do you think?

4 hours ago, heron said:

I think it’s a distinct possibility that the availability of legal abortion has saved more lives than all the lobbying, demonstrating, bombings and murders by the forced pregnancy fanatics.

You thinking it, doesn't make it so.   Show me something to back that up.

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Med-Surg.

Never mind.  I'm staying out of it.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Med-Surg.

Speaking of Fauci, the spinning going on in this article really is interesting.  

South Africa is reporting an increase number of covid cases due to the new variant but not a rise in hospitalizations.  This might influence how we look at things.  But because some people erred on the side of caution of the unknown, especially since the Delta variant is ripping through the United State right at this very moment hospitalizing people around the world in very high numbers, the anti-Fauci crowd are losing their minds.  

My favorite is this " Fauci needs to stop speculating and tell us what the facts are," Watters continued, "and then we can make our own judgments."

Watters can't possibly be even listening to Fauci.  

Senator Ron Johnson recently accused Fauci of overhyping covid just like he did with AIDS.  I wonder what gain Fauci is getting from overhyping and instilling fear?  They also think it's about government control.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/fauci-omicron-covid-the-five

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Public Health, TB.

The Republican Party has become pro-COVID. 

https://pressrun.media/p/spreading-covid-is-now-gops-top-priority

Here’s what’s painfully obvious, even if the political press doesn’t want to say so: Republicans aren’t merely anti-mask or anti-vaccine. They’re pro-Covid. Period. Republican politicians and commentators, who are fully vaccinated themselves, want the virus to spread and they want to extend the deadly pandemic so it inflicts political damage on Democrats next year. And yes, even if that means anti-science Republicans helping to spread the virus among their own voters, which ought to seem inconceivable, but is not. “Red America Has Seen the Highest Rates of Cases and Deaths, and the Lowest Rate of Vaccinations,” read a recent Washington Post headline.

In my community, people call in to local radio shows to extoll the virtues of "natural immunity", refuse to mask at the request of businesses, and show up to protest at vaccine clinics. At a clinic I worked at to immunize 5-11 year olds, the protesters approached the children waiting in line and warned them they were going to die. 

 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
4 hours ago, Beerman said:

It's pretty simple logic, really.  You're being disingenuous.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6457018/

No, it's not, really.  The number of abortions are, in general, decreasing.  Areas with the best access to reproductive health education and birth control have the lowest rates of abortion.  

That's an interesting article.  Did you know that states are not required to collect or report data to the CDC about abortion? That means that the data collected is not uniform or standardized at all and several states don't report any data.  That flawed data is largely the result of conservative legislative efforts and anti-abortion activism.  

When a woman discovers a pregnancy after 20 weeks gestation and requests termination that is considered a request for late term abortion...the requests at 21 weeks, 22weeks, 23 weeks, 24 weeks, etc.  The Guttmacher study reflected that women most likely to seek abortion after 20 weeks gestation are younger, poorer and less educated.  That all makes sense given that abortion and reproductive health services are intentionally limited for poor women across a variety of southern and politically conservative states. Restricted or limited access increases the likelihood that an abortion will be requested after the more common 12 weeks or so.  That's logical.

I found the author's discussion of medical necessity confusing.  Medical necessity determination is only needed for termination of pregnancy after 20 weeks.  Therefore, necessity is indeed irrelevant in the vast majority of abortions. In 3rd trimester abortions the medical necessity is a matter of collaborative assessment across a couple of disciplines and includes family. Are you questioning the judgement or ethics of the health professionals involved in these medical necessity deliberations?

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Hospice.
1 hour ago, Beerman said:

Actually,  I'm unaware of the potential of the moon to fall on our heads.  Please share.

Why are you so sure on demand abortions wouldn't happen?  Do you have something, anything, to back that up?

I agree on the education part.  Effective contraception is already available.

Not sure of what lies and distortions you're speaking of.  

WeCould be lots of reasons.   Possibly not related.  Why do you think?

You thinking it, doesn't make it so.   Show me something to back that up.

1. One well aimed asteroid and boom boom kaboom.

2. I’ve been in this fight for just about 50 years and have never once read or heard anyone advocate for on-demand abortion for any reason after the fetus reaches the stage of viability … and I run in some pretty radical circles. The only people who have talked about it this past half-century are the forced pregnancy advocates. Have already described the evolution of that particular straw man. However, if you’re looking for proof of a negative, you need to take a course in logic.

3. Glad you agree … sex ED (reality-based, not abstinence-only, which is a religious doctrine) and contraception need to be even more available for men as well as women.

The smartest parenting I ever did was to teach my son that he has reproductive rights, too, and that it’s up to him to make sure that he had his kids only when he was ready to be an actual father.

4. Lies and distortions? Got a week? Start with the subject of this particular sub-thread: that there is a serious proposal to legalize abortion for any reason up until the end of the third trimester. The claim that abortion is more dangerous than childbirth. The exaggeration of the physical and emotional aftereffects of abortion, including the implication that harmful side effects are universal. The assertion that medically induced abortion can be reversed and that ectopic pregnancies can be re-implanted in the uterus. That abortion causes breast cancer. Etc, etc, etc.

I suggest that you have a medically educated female friend seek services from any local crisis pregnancy center … I think you will find it eye-opening. They’re not hard to find … they often set up shop very close to an abortion provider.

5. I don’t know what you mean by this statement “probably unrelated”. Unrelated to what? Please clarify.

Meanwhile, how would you explain a drop from an estimated 1.3 million abortions in 1996 to 800K in 2017 (according to the Guttmacher Institute)?

6. Where did I state that speculation as fact? You’re certainly welcome to design a study to test the hypothesis. Meanwhile I get to wonder about It. 

2
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in LPN/Pallative Hospice.
4 hours ago, MunoRN said:

What protects Physicians currently is legal precedence that defines what that exemption means.  This means that in a particular scenario they are not putting themselves at risk because that scenario has already been established to fit the legal requirements of the law.

When it comes to enforcement of laws related to abortion Texas has now switched from Common Law to Civil Law, precedents don't apply in Civil Law which leaves no reliable or predictable precedent for Physicians to follow, each scenario is a much larger risk to them and even if they successfully argue that their scenario fit the definition that may only occur after extensive court deliberations, as opposed to the current process where there is nothing that needs deliberating.

You seem to disagree that Common Law and Civil Law are two different things, but I'm not sure what you're basing that on.

So you are saying that Dr. Will get in trouble one way or another if the perform a abortion after viability if the woman's life is in danger? 

It's already standard practice to do this so I don't understand why the bill changes that? 

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Critical Care.
53 minutes ago, Cclm said:

So you are saying that Dr. Will get in trouble one way or another if the perform a abortion after viability if the woman's life is in danger? 

It's already standard practice to do this so I don't understand why the bill changes that? 

First, the Texas abortion law makes abortions illegal long before viability (embryos are not viable at 7 weeks).

Second, there are currently legally established criteria for when it is legally acceptable for a pregnancy to be terminated because legal precedents can exist in common law, the Texas abortion law moves the issue over to civil law, where precedents effectively don't exist.  This results in no reliable definition of when it's acceptable to terminate a pregnancy to preserve life.

3
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
10 hours ago, MunoRN said:

First, the Texas abortion law makes abortions illegal long before viability (embryos are not viable at 7 weeks).

Second, there are currently legally established criteria for when it is legally acceptable for a pregnancy to be terminated because legal precedents can exist in common law, the Texas abortion law moves the issue over to civil law, where precedents effectively don't exist.  This results in no reliable definition of when it's acceptable to terminate a pregnancy to preserve life.

Muno:  You make it so HARD when you interject with facts.  Obviously, too hard to make yourself understood:)  One cardiologist's testimony that the patient is in early heart failure is another MD (representing the state) that the patient can squeak through this pregnancy without the abortion.  Forget if she has other children at home - the ideology must be upheld.

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in LPN/Pallative Hospice.
3 hours ago, subee said:

Muno:  You make it so HARD when you interject with facts.  Obviously, too hard to make yourself understood:)  One cardiologist's testimony that the patient is in early heart failure is another MD (representing the state) that the patient can squeak through this pregnancy without the abortion.  Forget if she has other children at home - the ideology must be upheld.

No actually it very easy to understand Muno when they don't post stuff like this and actually explain the argument.....

"Why are you so eager to believe and spread the emotional propaganda? Are you really that indoctrinated and manipulated or are you trying to troll this group?". 

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in LPN/Pallative Hospice.
13 hours ago, MunoRN said:

First, the Texas abortion law makes abortions illegal long before viability (embryos are not viable at 7 weeks).

Second, there are currently legally established criteria for when it is legally acceptable for a pregnancy to be terminated because legal precedents can exist in common law, the Texas abortion law moves the issue over to civil law, where precedents effectively don't exist.  This results in no reliable definition of when it's acceptable to terminate a pregnancy to preserve life.

I do not think so. An intervention at any stage of pregnancy is not considered "abortion" in the literal sense. (Abortion, spontaneous, elective in medical terminology is the same). 

The Texas law excluded termination in threat of the mothers life. Is the same as a premature baby being delivered at 7 month because of placenta previa etc. The mother is saved and all 3ffort the baby is too so unless you are saying that the Dr. Could still be subject to any type of litigation, that is false. That would effectively cause possible  legal implications for an everyday OBGYN early induction of labour, emergency c-section before 40 weeks. Show me in the Texas bill that says that. If it does I would like to see. I didn't read that in the bill. 

So it could be both bills need more precise terminology? Pretty much for the same thing. 

What excluded in termination in the mothers health life(Texas bill) and termination of risk to mothers life/health late term(democrats bill). 

I do not support any of the civil legal stipulations in the Texas bill by the way. But I was originally questioning the Democrat bill. 

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
16 minutes ago, Cclm said:

No actually it very easy to understand Muno when they don't post stuff like this and actually explain the argument.....

"Why are you so eager to believe and spread the emotional propaganda? Are you really that indoctrinated and manipulated or are you trying to troll this group?". 

If only the facts presented to you in argument influenced your thinking or opinion. Unfortunately there's little evidence of that.  

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Join the Discussion