[#Wat] Is Virginia’s governor promoting infanticide?

Tbf the sky isn't blue either. It's actually violet but the cones in our eyes don't have a high sensitivity to that light, so we see it as blue instead. Violet and yellow are two regions where our eyes don't see too well.

 

murder in the first born degree

 

Very powerful.

 

There are plenty of doctors who vary on opinion and ethical decency. You can't punch a hole in my argument because it is reality. You can deny reality if you so wish.

 

Can you abort a governor ship in the first trimester?

Governor gets in blackface and infanticide scandal in one week

 

we have a thread for this already...

 

It works here I think.

 

I actually think that was the purpose of having 3 doctors instead of one. I'm not sure I know the point you were making so I may be responding to something you didn't intend. But, if you meant that doctors were unlikely to sell their medical judgment in potential life/death situations, I think the field, like any other, is made up of primarily good folks and some bad. Think pill mill docs helping to contribute to death by opiates.

 

If you were part of a group that casts judgment, you are acting as a judge, since you are judging a situation.

Last I checked hospitals have an ethics committee. An ethics committee's entire purpose is to cast down judgment on ethical issues. They aren't acting as a jury, jurys can't interpret law.. which is what the members of the ethics committee are doing.. this is why you can say they are acting as judges.

Last I checked it is not uncommon in the slightest bit for doctors to be an active and integral part of that ethics committee.

To make a statement that doctors 'are not like judges' considering many do act as judges and all are essentially encouraged to be judges may show a lack of understanding on how the medical field works.

 

Again I don't think you understand how the law is applied and these decisions get made. There is no "panel" it's just getting 3 doc signatures which is just bureaucratic and heaps up cost on the medical system raising everyone's premiums since you have to have 3 doctors now evaluate a patient. That makes no sense whatsoever. You mistakenly think there is this magical panel that will review cases - I think you should first look into the way it was working in the past first.

 

I'm coming in late to these conversations. Can someone bring me up to speed?

 

Murdering babies is no big deal compared to that photo

 

lmao. Hospital ethics committee's are a panel, it's not 3 doctors sitting around giving signatures. An ethics committee is a panel that reviews cases. 3 people? Pff try 30 people, this is how ethical dilemma's get resolved in the hospital when it comes to patient care.

I don't think it's a magical make believe panel that reviews cases. I think it's a real panel that reviews cases.

 

I don't think the reason behind the 3 doctor requirement was to drive up costs. The idea was to make sure that you had a some reasonable certitude that the mother's well-being was at risk or that the baby was not viable.

Not everything is about right vs left. Doctors are human and can make mistakes or can be flawed. We are told to get a second opinion for a reason. Here, while you may believe this is only about a woman's right to control her body, others believe at least as strongly that at some point (some believe at conception; others believe later; third trimester is a tough one to argue given the number of premature babies that survive when born in the third trimester) we are talking about a human life.

I really don't think that it is an unnecessary cost or bureacratic inconvenience to have more than one opinion that the mother's well-being is really at stake or that the baby is not viable for a late-term abortion.

 

I'm afraid this could be a bad horror movie and if you say "slippery ######" again, we will be confronted with 3 pages of Nolen expounding on fallacies.

 

fallacies about fallacies

 

well we don't see ultraviolet light at all - what color is assigned to that?

 

Is that the law says, that the hospital's ethics panel will make the decision? I read the law and it didn't mention the hospital being involved. It just said 3 doctors - who picks those doctors? The patient or the hospital?

 

Again, is this how the law works? The hospital picks the doctors to review the case? What if it's a life or death situation and waiting for the panel could cost the mother her life? Is that acceptable? I thought the law states 3 doctors, and implied that the patient could pick any 3 doctors.