[RD] Abortion, once again

[Senethro]

How much of an overhead would that be?

I don't like being too mercenary with the cost of human welfare services. It ends up in weird places.

This also isn't a good example to work with. The pregnancy test would be very cheap. The life support requirements would be so high as to be difficult to meaningfully quantify.

 

[Angst]

Pulling life support when it's only about whether the body dies now or later is normal. But it's not just about it. It's about another life too. And that's where the issue lies.

You want to stick to abortion line, fine.

first, let me cut through here - you say "It's about another life too", it's not me or anyone who forces the abortion line onto you. you are literally doing that.

Let's see if I can get through that way. Every abortion is a compromise at best, choosing the lesser evil at worst. Some people try to avoid that reality, call fetus a non-sentient clump of cells..but that clump of cells is well on its way to become a human being, and that potential is what's traded away for a benefit of actual human being.

i don't think abortion is evil at all, so there's no lesser. at least not in this case. you probably think i'm avoiding some reality, because it's pretty clear where your stance is here, but to me it's just a medical procedure.

and a sidenote on that. basically if we follow the logic of the brain-dead body being a clump of cells, the involved people being able to arbitrarily terminate it... this is consistent with what is done during abortion, fwiw. both are terminating clumps of cells - to explain where other people are coming from. but this jurisdiction is taken away because, as you yourself put it, harvesting from this dying body is more important than the next of kin's wishes. whatever the dying body thought of its dignity or whatever the family's considerations of the body's dignity, you're suspending that. you restrict that jurisdiction, not by arguing that people should hold no right over the dead in their family, but because a pregnancy is involved. which is the point of my contention here:

But now we're in a situation where on one side is just an actual non-sentient clump of cells, with no potential other than rot.What makes it more valuable in this tradeoff than the potential of the other clump that can become a human being?

besides the wondrous utility of free reign of harvesting all of the corpses here. you note yourself "Pulling life support when it's only about whether the body dies now or later is normal.", therefore you agree with the family's rights to deciding what happens with this braindead woman, and you agree that the situation has solely become complicated because there's a question of pregnancy and a termination of that involved.

i think you're more pulled in by the media environment than i am, so here's something that might surprise you: i'm not arguing for them to abort the baby.

of course, i believe that it's up to them (or should be). but point is, it's not why i'm in contention with you. i'm pushing back at you holding two contrary positions; that somehow this both is and isn't about abortion. that's the nonsensical part. you can't both grant next in kin consent over what happens with the body, then except cases of terminating pregnancy, and then say this consent isn't withheld over terminating pregnancy. i'm not annoyed with you for wanting the pregnancy to continue, i'm annoyed at you for saying s that doesn't make any sense.

once more, with feeling, to summarize your outlined positions relatively logically;
- pulling life support is normal
- pulling life support is the jurisdiction of the next of kin
- this situation is an exception because there's a pregnancy involved
- the pregnancy involved is not relevant to the exception

it doesn't make any sense. so sorry, this is about abortion. it's not politicized by whatever media figure you think it is. like, nevermind that the exception is literally happening because of the state's abortion laws. the government who hates abortion literally doesn't let this happen because they think it's abortion and hate it. it's why the doctors and family can't do anything.

 

[CKS]

(remember this is actually only six weeks, because we count pregnancies from two weeks before conception)

wait what i missed this, can you source?

i trust that it's true, it's just absurd legislation to me

I don't know that it is legislation, just common practice. At least in the US, we count pregnancy from the first day of the last period. For people who stop having periods right away (not everyone does) when they get pregnant, this is about 2 weeks before ovulation, and so about 2 weeks before conception can occur.

From the Cleveland Clinic (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/7247-fetal-development-stages-of-growth):

When does a pregnancy start?​

The start of pregnancy is actually the first day of your last menstrual period (LMP). This is the gestational age of the fetus. It’s about two weeks ahead of when conception actually occurs. Though it may seem strange, the date of the first day of your last period will be an important date when determining your due date. Your healthcare provider will ask you about this date and will use it to figure out how far along you are in your pregnancy.

 

[Angst]

I don't know that it is legislation, just common practice. At least in the US, we count pregnancy from the first day of the last period. For people who stop having periods right away (not everyone does) when they get pregnant, this is about 2 weeks before ovulation, and so about 2 weeks before conception can occur.

From the Cleveland Clinic (https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/7247-fetal-development-stages-of-growth):

ah ok so there's actually medical reasons for this. it makes sense, but then it's like... the legislation was already completely insane. basically the moment your period is late, like by the day, you want to take a pregnancy test, i guess, otherwise..

and that's not even counting those who keep having periods...

i am tired.

 

[Arwon]

The problem is of course turning a polite medical fiction that's just approximated for convenience, into an ironclad basis for severe legal consequences.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I wonder who will get the baby? Will it be forced on someone?

 

[Lexicus]

I wonder who will get the baby? Will it be forced on someone?

There will be no baby

 

[Angst]

the fetus's brain has liquid wholly inside. chances are it's not gonna have a good time, alive or not. as is, chances are it's not even going to be viable, from what i've gathered. i don't know what the policy is with that kind of stuff in georgia, but i presume it depends on a bunch of stuff, if it survives
- whether her boyfriend (which i presume is the father) is legally responsible for the kid, i presume this is the case
- whether he is able to take care of an intensely disabled child alone, i presume that this isn't the case
- whether that is legal cause for him to abandon guardianship, i presume this isn't the case, but let's roll with it,
- whether it then falls to the legal responsibility of the next of kin, and if not
- whether the state takes care of the kid in some capacity; i don't really know about the system there in the us at all, and i don't know whether additional care is taken for disabled orphans; i presume there isn't much support because murica, but i've been surprised before

what happens with disabled orphans in georgia is the basic question, mostly the last point

also what are these sentences, there's no way to not make this sound heinous, sorry. i didn't set up this frankenstein experiment

 

[Samson]

A Texas Cop Searched License Plate Cameras Nationwide for a Woman Who Got an Abortion

Earlier this month authorities in Texas performed a nationwide search of more than 83,000 automatic license plate reader (ALPR) cameras while looking for a woman who they said had a self-administered abortion, including cameras in states where abortion is legal such as Washington and Illinois, according to multiple datasets obtained by 404 Media.

The news shows in stark terms how police in one state are able to take the ALPR technology, made by a company called Flock and usually marketed to individual communities to stop carjackings or find missing people, and turn it into a tool for finding people who have had abortions. In this case, the sheriff told 404 Media the family was worried for the woman’s safety and so authorities used Flock in an attempt to locate her. But health surveillance experts said they still had issues with the nationwide search.

“You have this extraterritorial reach into other states, and Flock has decided to create a technology that breaks through the barriers, where police in one state can investigate what is a human right in another state because it is a crime in another,” Kate Bertash of the Digital Defense Fund, who researches both ALPR systems and abortion surveillance, told 404 Media.

On May 9, an officer from the Johnson County Sheriff’s Office in Texas searched Flock cameras and gave the reason as “had an abortion, search for female,” according to the multiple sets of data. Whenever officers search Flock cameras they are required to provide a reason for doing so, but generally do not require a warrant or any sort of court order. Flock cameras continually scan the plates, color, and model of any vehicle driving by, building a detailed database of vehicles and by extension peoples' movements.

Cops are able to search cameras acquired in their own district, those in their state, or those in a nationwide network of Flock cameras. That single search for the woman spread across 6,809 different Flock networks, with a total of 83,345 cameras, according to the data. The officer looked for hits over a month long period, it shows.

 

[Samson]

TfL blocks ads calling on people to lobby MPs to decriminalise abortion because they are nasty about the police

Transport for London has blocked adverts that urge people to lobby their MPs to vote to decriminalise abortion from running on its network because it claims they could bring the police and City Hall into disrepute.

Parliament is expected to vote on whether to decriminalise abortion in England and Wales in the coming weeks, with amendments tabled to the criminal justice bill seeking to change the law.

The adverts from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (Bpas) charity, which have been approved by the Advertising Standards Authority, have appeared on display boards across England and Wales. They feature anonymised case studies of women who have been investigated by police, and in some cases prosecuted, after terminations or pregnancy loss.

“The language is not inflammatory, derogatory or hateful,” Bpas said in a letter to TfL, seen by the Guardian. “It is an accurate representation of real women’s experiences. It is intentionally simple, to the point, with a clear democratic call to action.”

In a response from TfL, also seen by the Guardian, Chris Reader, the organisation’s head of commercial media, told the charity: “The reason for the rejection is that the proposed advertisement makes serious allegations about the police.

“The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (Mopac) is a member of the GLA group and one of its functions is to hold the Metropolitan police service (MPS) commissioner to account for the police service in London.”

He added that “because Mopac’s functions in respect of the MPS are to some extent regulatory”, the “nature of the copy could bring Mopac into disrepute, given its responsibilities in relation to the MPS”.

 

[Samson]

Women in West Virginia who miscarry could face criminal charges, prosecutor says

Women in West Virginia could face criminal charges if they miscarry, a county prosecutor told a local news outlet last week, urging women who miscarry to contact law enforcement.

“The kind of criminal jeopardy you face is going to depend on a lot of factors,” the Raleigh county prosecuting attorney Tom Truman told the outlet WVNS 59News in comments reported on Friday.

“What was your intent? What did you do? How late were you in your pregnancy? Were you trying to hide something, were you just so emotionally distraught you couldn’t do anything else?”

He added: “If you were relieved, and you had been telling people, ‘I’d rather get ran over by a bus than have this baby,’ that may play into law enforcement’s thinking, too.”

 

[Senethro]

No, that's very much in line with the stupid scenarios I cook up where a just fertilised egg is treated like a 5 year old. People treat those like I'm arguing in bad faith and in poor taste, and yet here we are.

Unfortunately it doesn't matter if they sincerely believe it and follow the logical consequences of their beliefs, or if they are cynical misogynists. The outcome is bad.

 

[danjuno]

Women in West Virginia who miscarry could face criminal charges, prosecutor says

Women in West Virginia could face criminal charges if they miscarry, a county prosecutor told a local news outlet last week, urging women who miscarry to contact law enforcement.

“The kind of criminal jeopardy you face is going to depend on a lot of factors,” the Raleigh county prosecuting attorney Tom Truman told the outlet WVNS 59News in comments reported on Friday.

“What was your intent? What did you do? How late were you in your pregnancy? Were you trying to hide something, were you just so emotionally distraught you couldn’t do anything else?”

He added: “If you were relieved, and you had been telling people, ‘I’d rather get ran over by a bus than have this baby,’ that may play into law enforcement’s thinking, too.”

Why am I not surprised to see my state popping up in the news more and more frequently?