Log In | Register
Kansas lawmakers have been given six days to consider one of the most sweeping state anti-abortion bills to be introduced.
A Kansas House committee is scheduled to take up a bill Wednesday that would exempt doctors from malpractice suits if they withheld medical information to prevent an abortion. The measure would also take away tax credits for abortion providers, remove tax deductions for the purchase of abortion-related insurance coverage and require women to hear the fetal heartbeat. The bill includes several provisions, which passed in other states and now face federal lawsuits. The bill would also require women be told about potential breast cancer risks from abortions, even though medical experts discount such a connection.
Kansas Abortion Bill Would Impose Sweeping Restrictions
Seeded on Tue Feb 7, 2012 12:59 AM EST
Article Source: The Huffington Post
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (8)
Among the most contested provisions of the bill is the section that would exempt a doctor from a medical malpractice suit if a woman claims the physician withheld information about potential birth defects to prevent her from having an abortion. In addition, a woman would not be able to sue if she suffers health damage from a pregnancy as a result of information withheld from her to prevent an abortion. A wrongful death suit could still be filed, however, if the mother died.
I don't even know what to say about this. Other than that it's like they're thrashing around in a mad panic to see how extreme they can be without actually...I don't know...making women legal wards of the state.
- 4 votes
#1 - Tue Feb 7, 2012 1:02 AM ESTits better for everybody all the way around if women never tell anybody their pregnant, and just self-perform abortions when necessary.
thats the way god intended it.
how come only kansas is smart enough to figure that out?
lol
- 2 votes
#2 - Tue Feb 7, 2012 1:32 AM ESTits better for everybody all the way around if women never tell anybody their pregnant,
I know you meant that with a /s/ tag but, really...that's not the best way to assure a good outcome for any woman's pregnancy if she's too afraid of prosecution (for whatever reason) too seek prenatal care.
- 2 votes
sorry, but i had no intention of assuring a good outcome for women's pregnancies.
i really just wanted to call kansas stupid and mock them a little.
- 3 votes
i really just wanted to call kansas stupid and mock them a little.
Ah, well join the club. I live here and sometimes it feels like there's a black hole of stupid sucking the brains out of the place. I think it's centered in Topeka.
- 2 votes
On January 22, 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its landmark decision, Roe v. Wade, recognizing the constitutional right to privacy and a woman’s right to choose abortion.
http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/positions/roe-v-wade-643.htm
The problem with our system is that once a point of law is decided, the next group can decide another way. As long as the right to privacy between a Doctor and his patient is upheld, abortion will remain legal. When the right to privacy is denied, all medical records could be made public knowledge. Would any of you want that?
- 4 votes
#3 - Tue Feb 7, 2012 2:07 AM ESTWhen will people learn that what others choose to do regarding their own health and well being is simply none of anyone elses business?
- 2 votes
#4 - Tue Feb 7, 2012 10:40 AM ESTWell, apparently we're just fine if we want to decide to have litters of babies but we're too stupid to decide NOT to.
- 3 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
