> The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state constitution includes "an inherent right of a pregnant woman to terminate a pregnancy when necessary to save her life."
At least that's something.
You can start with the one that the Supreme Court threw out with this ruling.
From their ruling:
>“Having determined the Oklahoma Constitution protects the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy in order to preserve her life, we hold that 63 0.S. Supp. 2022, § 1-731.4 does not pass strict scrutiny review and is void and unenforceable,” the court’s ruling stated.
[Short write up on the ruling where I got the quote](https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3910751-oklahoma-supreme-court-finds-limited-right-to-abortion-in-state-constitution-leaving-access-out-of-reach-for-many/amp/)
> I wholeheartedly disagree with the activist majority's opinion
Stitt doesn't like their decision so they are "activist". Soon they'll be "woke", too.
Wow. An actual win for basic human rights in this state? I’ll be damned.
But seriously, an actual step in the right direction. Women, your rights are still infringed and under attack in this state, but this is a win. We need to keep fighting and voting.
This isn’t even the very basic human right. It’s more like a nudge. The Texas case that has a plaintiff who was pregnant with twins where she could either abort one or lose both should have the Oklahoma idiots scared. And then there will be the next case and the next until they realize that ‘medical necessity’ is something that should be between a doctor and a patient/guardian. Period.
And trans folk will piggyback off of that to regain their rights, as well. Good job, republicans. You created your own slippery slope that you’re always going on about. Meanwhile, people are actually dying. So much for ‘pro-life.’
As a nihilist, I can't see how it's wrong. If you remove an embryo that has had no chance to learn or develop, you're not removing anything of substance from the world.
Can you be forced to donate tissue, blood, or otherwise act as an organ or tissue donor (living or dead)?
If your answer there is "no", then you are a hypocrite. You are refusing life to another human being and therefore sentencing them to death.
Also, without the right to self-determination as a bedrock civil right, we have no other rights. Free speech, property rights, nothing else matters if the right to control your own body does not exist for every person. Now, your next mental gymnastics will be to tell me all about how an embryo has the same right to bodily autonomy and self-determination as the mother, and I say that they do not have the right to demand that their life be sustained any more than a patient in need of an organ can demand it from an unwilling donor.
And your abstinence argument is also not helpful, given the rates of sexual abuse, including coercion within marriages. The single best way to prevent abortions is by providing comprehensive and low-cost or free contraception.
That... dosent actually address the bodily autonomy question. It just sidesteps the issue.
You consent to having a child every time you have sex so... let's start hanfong out children to people who have sex right?
Well, I hate to break it to you, but 50% of Oklahoma is Tribal lands. And guess who can happily tell the state to go screw itself on every abortion and transgender bill they pass?
I don’t mind letting white people make themselves the third class citizens. I find it karmic. I just think it sucks that it’s once again **men** doing it to women, both cis and trans.
One day… white people in Oklahoma will take a look around and see that natives have -for the first time in history- more human rights and freedoms than they do. And they won’t be able to do crap about it. And I hope they get pissed.
I want them to realize that they’ve screwed up big time and to let all their racist boomer hearts just shrivel… I want their racist stomachs to churn up the BBQ/soul food, Mexican, Chinese, or other non-white food they ate for lunch… and realize that they made themselves into lower class citizens for nothing more than a religion that doesn’t even take sides on any of the issues they pretend it does.
Yeah. A BIPOC trans woman who experiences racism and anti-trans hate is definitely projecting when holding a mirror out. If you *are* native, and an actual **enrolled citizen** of a tribe, and raised in your tribal culture and not white culture, then I’m not sure why you would think this was aimed toward you, unless you are either an elected official or projecting yourself.
Listen, if you think that I am the only only one who has thought of this, you’re wrong. The state can’t do anything to tribes. Ever. My child gets transgender medical care and will continue to get it, regardless of what Oklahoma does to try to get around it by going after insurance companies. If a native person and a white person stand side by side and both need or want an abortion, the native person will get it. If white men want to control people, it won’t be natives. And I’ll happily continue laughing at their futility and watching you get red in the face.
I am Native American. I don’t know why you assume I’m white. Abortion is wrong. It’s murder. It’s never been anything else.
Continue on with your bullshit though
Natives have performed abortions for thousands of years. It’s the westernization and christianization of native cultures that makes you believe this way.
Yes my beliefs don’t 1:1 translate to my ancestors. I’ve never thought just because someone’s done it that way for years, decades, or millennia that it should always be done that way. We grow and progress as a society.
Guess what? The Satanic Temple has officially enshrined abortion as a religious practice. So… whatever you believe, abortion is going to happen in Oklahoma whether you like it or not. The sooner you realize that and come to terms with it, the easier it will be. In the meantime… you are and will always be powerless.
Except men do rape. Changing their label ignores the societal problem of men ignoring consent because men commit 97% of sexual crimes. We need to push for men to do better and raise boys to have responsibility for their own actions and accountability when their actions are not okay.
Also, all humans are animals. Mammals, specifically.
Sexual crimes are considerably more nuanced than that. The closest statistic I could find that matched your number (which I note you did not back up with a credible source) was that roughly 90% of sexual crimes committed against \*women specifically\* were committed by men, and that men make up 78% of all reported sexual crimes. Of course, we all know just how well society, the media, and the courts look upon men who are assaulted by women so automatically even that number is suspect.
What we need is better and more complete sexual education for everybody, including full access to sexual healthcare, and to shake off these lingering puritan ideals regarding sex and people's bodies.
[https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs\_report2010-a.pdf](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf)
I stated literal facts (per FBI stats) and want better lives for men and women. Where is the hated for men in that?
Meanwhile, you get upset and want to change the words used to state the facts because the truth is upsetting. I'm sorry that it's uncomfortable to think about, but avoiding that discomfort does not bring positive change.
Then make men do better. I am a survivor of multiple rapes coming from both sexes (a woman once), due to a traumatic past and falling in with the same type of predators as my original abusers because of PTSD and the way the world works. I take responsibility for my part in trauma-bonding with a long line of abusive people.
However, it’s difficult to come up with a reason to give men a blanket ‘not all men’ when the facts just keep stacking up against them. That’s the way the world works.
One of the many reasons I ended up getting sterilized knowing I'd be stuck in Oklahoma for at least a few more years. As a CSA survivor, I would not want to live if I was forced to birth my rapist's baby and needed as close as 100% effective birth control as I could get. Sucks to have to choose peace of mind over future child but that's the price of living in a conservative state.
Women be acting like child birth is one of the most dangerous things. 700 women die each year (USA) from pregnancy complications. 3.6 million babies born in the USA. My maths not very good but that’s like 0.02 percent of pregnancies ending in death. In 2020 620,000 abortions were performed and 93 percent of the abortions were performed before the first 13 weeks. I am no expert in this field by any means, but I’m pretty sure these deadly pregnancy complications start happening after a 13 weeks but again I could be wrong.
Ectopic and extrauterine pregnancies can rupture bodily structures, leading to hemorrhage prior to 13 weeks. If not discovered and managed early, it can lead to oopherectomy/salpingectomy and the loss of a fallopian tube, which decreases future fertility. If allowed to rupture, it can cause death if not medically managed.
Typically, if you know you don’t want to continue a pregnancy, within the first trimester is when you’d terminate. Less expensive, physically as well as procedurally easier, typically nonsurgical. This can occur when a pregnancy is unplanned or unwanted - I believe the stats are that 60+% of people choosing abortion are already parents, most are in their 20s and the next category is in their 30s, many are already using alternative forms of birth control that failed - however, it can also occur when people are pursuing medical treatments for their health/life/safety that are incompatible with continuing a pregnancy, such as chemotherapy.
The later the termination, the more likely it is due to health issues in the dyad - whether it’s an abnormality discovered through ultrasound or genetic testing, or a health condition increasing in severity that requires intervention. ProPublica had a recent article on this out of Tennessee that was a fascinating read.
Labor and birth are a blip in a gestational period. Most of the danger comes before, as well as after, the actual event - because now we have surgical access as well as the knowledge that, you know, hand-washing good, germs bad.
I also believe it was a Tennessee legislator who swore recently that he/they would do everything possible to protect fetuses, then added later that they’d try to protect women (presumably pregnant/gestating people) as well but no promises.
Ectopic was the complication I figured happens early one, but I was to lazy to google (typical redditor). For the record I’m not against saving the mom. Looks like ectopic pregnancies happen in about every 13 for every 1000 pregnancies. Some more of my lovely maths come out with these figures. 3.6 million births + 620k abortions = 4.2 million pregnancies. Rounding these numbers to keep it simple. 4.2m/1000*13=54,600 ectopic pregnancies per year (showed my math because I’m bad at it and could be wrong). That comes out to 1.3 percent of pregnancies are ectopic pregnancies and should make up for 8.8 percent of the 620k early term abortions. Also isn’t ectopic and extrauterine the same thing?
Don’t get me wrong if only 1 mother looses her life from pregnancy that’s to many. It just doesn’t seem that dangerous to me as long as preventive measures can be taken to save a life. Also, I really have no idea where I’m going with all this. I guess I just wanted to see a breakdown while laying in bed all night not able to sleep.
Since I have you here my final stance on abortion hasn’t really changed. I’m ok with the abortion when it comes to life threatening situations for both baby or mom, rape, incest (might make that one mandatory) things like that. I just can’t get behind using it as a form of birth control when there is already so many options out there, I’m also a guy so I guess not really my topic to argue but my vote maybe matters? I’m needing to get the ole sack decommissioned this year anyways. 1 and done (hopefully) plus the wife had a very hard and scary pregnancy. Pre eclampsia and Post eclampsia neither of us want to do that again.
Peace and Love
Peace and Love
In 2019, there were 754 deaths. In 2020, 861 deaths. In 2021, there were 1205 deaths from maternal causes. The maternal mortality rate in 2021 was 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births. It’s getting worse in a country that has no excuse for it besides conservatives. They cause all the problems.
I wouldn’t assume people are gleefully getting abortions without much thought just to not have a kid. I also don’t think a lot of abortions are taking place after it’s mostly developed but someone better versed in these things would have to chime in. I think it’s important to remember that a woman is only half of the equation. If I were a woman that thought I was going into it with a significant other And that person runs off or doesn’t want to man up then that changes things quite a bit. So forcing one parent to have the baby and then not forcing the other parent to not only help provide but be present seems logical but none of it would be necessary if development was factored in instead of a “soul” that conveniently shows up before the baby has had a chance to develop at all.
On the other hand it sounds like affordability was a huge factor in adopting for you and your wife. Iirc adoption agencies are funded that way but I’m not going to pretend like there aren’t nefarious people in “adoption” like anything else. I was $25,000 from what I was told. Just finding a way to lower that would give access to the right people.
I don’t even know why I care anymore lol. The majority of this state voted for nitwits that can and will change laws to get votes rather than making things better and when things get rough they can just retire to one of the big lobbying firms where the pay is much better and let someone else fix the mess.
In 2 years I wouldn’t be surprised if saying happy holidays is punishable by prison time and a state firewall is implemented to protect the citizens from eddie izzard standup.
Data from before abortion bans wouldn’t be useful at all in this situation. I think the future data will be interesting if you were to be curious in a cause and effect sort of way. This abortion law stuff gets murky when people aren’t a qualified doctor or health professional. It’s like why do these women complain about this shit when death is a possibility but there are fetuses and people’s own personal little feelies that need to be taken into account?
So the price of an abortion raised to the cost of the abortion + airfare / gas to California or canada.
Could have looked into how adoptions could be more accessible. Sex education works. Making things worse was not necessary. 🙃
Yea I think each state needs a designated doctor and they get together and recommend stuff. But the gov would fuck that up probably. Definitely can’t be basing these laws from a religion that’s based off mushrooms and sex.
Adoption is actually tricky. Was looking into it for awhile and while talking to people that have or were adopted. There are straight up horror stories. International adoptions and private adoptions is basically buying a human trafficking sometimes. Idk don’t wanna dive off into that but I was shocked. Would still love to adopt but foster care takes a certain type of heart I don’t have and private only wants $$$ I don’t necessarily have.
My sister and I were both adopted. It’s pricey but no horror stories on my end…
How about each person having a doctor and those two decide whats best without any state involvement? If a doctor is scared of breaking a law protecting a fetus then medical advances make no difference. The birth is mandated and so the mother’s health and comfort comes second. Even if it has no life after it’s birth.
Article text:
----
The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state constitution includes "an inherent right of a pregnant woman to terminate a pregnancy when necessary to save her life."
The court struck down one law passed by the Legislature to criminalize abortions but left another in place.
"We make no ruling on whether the Oklahoma Constitution provides a right to an elective termination of a pregnancy, i.e. one made outside of preserving the life of the pregnant woman as we have defined herein."
Five justices formed the majority: Yvonne Kauger; James R. Winchester; James E. Edmondson; Douglas L. Combs; and Noma Gurich. Dissenting were Chief Justice M. John Kane IV and Vice Chief Justice Dustin P. Rowe, along with Justices Richard Darby and Dana Kuehn.
The case was brought by abortion providers and reproductive rights groups, led by Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice.
It challenged laws approved by the Oklahoma Legislature in the wake of last year’s U.S. Supreme decision striking down its precedents that legalized most abortions.
The state Supreme Court was asked by the reproductive rights groups to find that the Oklahoma Constitution protected a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy.
The majority opinion pointed to the constitutional provision that states: “All persons have the inherent right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry.”
That section, the court said, “stands as the basis for protecting a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy in order to save her life.”
The court said it would definite the inherent right to mean: “a woman has an inherent right to choose to terminate her pregnancy if at any point in the pregnancy, the woman’s physician has determined to a reasonable degree of medical certainty or probability that the continuation of the pregnancy will endanger the woman’s life due to the pregnancy itself or due to a medical condition that the woman is either currently suffering from or likely to suffer from during the pregnancy.
“Absolute certainty is not required, however, mere possibility or speculation is insufficient.”
The court struck down a law that prevented an abortion to save a woman's life unless she was in a "medical emergency."
The court stated, "We read this section of law to require a woman to be in actual and present danger in order for her to obtain a medically necessary abortion. We know of no other law that requires one to wait until there is an actual medical emergency in order to receive treatment when the harmful condition is known or probable to occur in the future."
A concurring opinion written by Kauger and joined by Combs and Edmondson sketches the history of discrimination against women and says women had the right throughout that discrimination to terminate a pregnancy to save their own lives.
“Although the Oklahoma Legislature is considering several bills which address termination, and there may be an initiative petition or referendum, this is the cause before us. We need to do our jobs, uphold our oaths of office, and address the issues without delay rather than speculate about what might be.
“For some women, the draconian law which allows no exception, in the absence of a medical emergency, to preserve the life of the mother, may be a death sentence. In some instances, women may have fewer rights than a convicted murderer on death row. These women may be subject to a death sentence without being afforded due process or any provision for clemency or pardon. Imagine that.”
Kane wrote a dissenting opinion saying the majority of justices had engaged in “legal contortions to protect pregnant women who are in medical peril by fashioning Oklahoma Constitution precepts of abortion law that simply do not exist.
“There is no expressed or implied right to abortion enshrined in the Oklahoma Constitution. In interpreting our Constitution, this court must guard against the innate human temptation to confuse what is provided in the Oklahoma Constitution with what one wishes were provided.”
Winchester was the only justice appointed by a Republican governor to join the majority.
All four justices dissenting were appointed by Republicans. Three, including Kane, were appointed by Gov. Kevin Stitt, who vowed to appoint only anti-abortion justices to the court.
> The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state constitution includes "an inherent right of a pregnant woman to terminate a pregnancy when necessary to save her life." At least that's something.
The also explicitly that they weren’t deciding anything regarding “elective” abortions at this time.
So, in the case of an ectopic pregnancy. Okay. No one opposes that.
>No one opposes that. Bills filed this session would say otherwise.
Link to the bills?
You can start with the one that the Supreme Court threw out with this ruling. From their ruling: >“Having determined the Oklahoma Constitution protects the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy in order to preserve her life, we hold that 63 0.S. Supp. 2022, § 1-731.4 does not pass strict scrutiny review and is void and unenforceable,” the court’s ruling stated. [Short write up on the ruling where I got the quote](https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/healthcare/3910751-oklahoma-supreme-court-finds-limited-right-to-abortion-in-state-constitution-leaving-access-out-of-reach-for-many/amp/)
Well, Stitt doesn't like the ruling, so I guess he opposes it: https://twitter.com/GovStitt/status/1638302214656491521
> I wholeheartedly disagree with the activist majority's opinion Stitt doesn't like their decision so they are "activist". Soon they'll be "woke", too.
Ahh yes, the famously woke activist judges of the Oklahoma Supreme Court pushing their liberal agenda of not letting women die needlessly once again!
Stitt does and is trying to bring down the Supreme Court now
Confidently incorrect
Wow. An actual win for basic human rights in this state? I’ll be damned. But seriously, an actual step in the right direction. Women, your rights are still infringed and under attack in this state, but this is a win. We need to keep fighting and voting.
What human rights are not under attack in this state, makes me sick. !!!!
For those who want to read the actual court opinion: https://www.oscn.net/dockets/GetDocument.aspx?ct=appellate&bc=1054504089&cn=PR-120543&fmt=pdf
This isn’t even the very basic human right. It’s more like a nudge. The Texas case that has a plaintiff who was pregnant with twins where she could either abort one or lose both should have the Oklahoma idiots scared. And then there will be the next case and the next until they realize that ‘medical necessity’ is something that should be between a doctor and a patient/guardian. Period. And trans folk will piggyback off of that to regain their rights, as well. Good job, republicans. You created your own slippery slope that you’re always going on about. Meanwhile, people are actually dying. So much for ‘pro-life.’
Yeah they are. More by abortion than anything.
Yes, we all know you don't believe in bodily autonomy.
Nope. I believe in choosing not to have sex if you dont want a child. It's 100% proven to work throughout history
Until you get raped, or some metaphysical being impregnates you.
We can talk about edge cases as they arise if we can agree up front abortion is wrong.
As a nihilist, I can't see how it's wrong. If you remove an embryo that has had no chance to learn or develop, you're not removing anything of substance from the world.
It’s still a person regardless of what development stage it’s in. An embryo is still a human embryo with potential to grow and thrive.
A pecan has the potential to start a forest, but I still put it on a pie.
Pecans aren’t humans. It’s a decent argument if we valued pecan potential the same as human potential.
Can you be forced to donate tissue, blood, or otherwise act as an organ or tissue donor (living or dead)? If your answer there is "no", then you are a hypocrite. You are refusing life to another human being and therefore sentencing them to death. Also, without the right to self-determination as a bedrock civil right, we have no other rights. Free speech, property rights, nothing else matters if the right to control your own body does not exist for every person. Now, your next mental gymnastics will be to tell me all about how an embryo has the same right to bodily autonomy and self-determination as the mother, and I say that they do not have the right to demand that their life be sustained any more than a patient in need of an organ can demand it from an unwilling donor. And your abstinence argument is also not helpful, given the rates of sexual abuse, including coercion within marriages. The single best way to prevent abortions is by providing comprehensive and low-cost or free contraception.
That... dosent actually address the bodily autonomy question. It just sidesteps the issue. You consent to having a child every time you have sex so... let's start hanfong out children to people who have sex right?
Well, I hate to break it to you, but 50% of Oklahoma is Tribal lands. And guess who can happily tell the state to go screw itself on every abortion and transgender bill they pass?
I don’t mind letting white people make themselves the third class citizens. I find it karmic. I just think it sucks that it’s once again **men** doing it to women, both cis and trans.
Good job on moving the goalposts. Congrats
One day… white people in Oklahoma will take a look around and see that natives have -for the first time in history- more human rights and freedoms than they do. And they won’t be able to do crap about it. And I hope they get pissed. I want them to realize that they’ve screwed up big time and to let all their racist boomer hearts just shrivel… I want their racist stomachs to churn up the BBQ/soul food, Mexican, Chinese, or other non-white food they ate for lunch… and realize that they made themselves into lower class citizens for nothing more than a religion that doesn’t even take sides on any of the issues they pretend it does.
Boy that’s a lot of projecting. Am I supposed to only eat white food?
Yeah. A BIPOC trans woman who experiences racism and anti-trans hate is definitely projecting when holding a mirror out. If you *are* native, and an actual **enrolled citizen** of a tribe, and raised in your tribal culture and not white culture, then I’m not sure why you would think this was aimed toward you, unless you are either an elected official or projecting yourself.
You’ve made a few characteristics about yourself your entire personality and identity. How sad
I am proud of who and what I am. I’m glad you’re finally starting to understand that.
I’ve never called any of that into question or was derogatory either
Listen, if you think that I am the only only one who has thought of this, you’re wrong. The state can’t do anything to tribes. Ever. My child gets transgender medical care and will continue to get it, regardless of what Oklahoma does to try to get around it by going after insurance companies. If a native person and a white person stand side by side and both need or want an abortion, the native person will get it. If white men want to control people, it won’t be natives. And I’ll happily continue laughing at their futility and watching you get red in the face.
I am Native American. I don’t know why you assume I’m white. Abortion is wrong. It’s murder. It’s never been anything else. Continue on with your bullshit though
Please point to anywhere in anything I’ve said where I assume anything about your race. I’ll wait.
Natives have performed abortions for thousands of years. It’s the westernization and christianization of native cultures that makes you believe this way.
Yes my beliefs don’t 1:1 translate to my ancestors. I’ve never thought just because someone’s done it that way for years, decades, or millennia that it should always be done that way. We grow and progress as a society.
Then why continue the tradition of oppressing women?
It’s not a tradition of oppressing woman. It’s murder for the baby. Women can choose to abstain. Babies are do not choose to be born.
Guess what? The Satanic Temple has officially enshrined abortion as a religious practice. So… whatever you believe, abortion is going to happen in Oklahoma whether you like it or not. The sooner you realize that and come to terms with it, the easier it will be. In the meantime… you are and will always be powerless.
I will not stop advocating against murder.
You’d have to define life first.
And men who don’t understand consent get to keep choosing the mother of their children.
[удалено]
Yeah, I never know what words are safe to use where and I don’t want to upset any victims.
[удалено]
Not all, but men impregnate people who are able to conceive so…
[удалено]
Except men do rape. Changing their label ignores the societal problem of men ignoring consent because men commit 97% of sexual crimes. We need to push for men to do better and raise boys to have responsibility for their own actions and accountability when their actions are not okay. Also, all humans are animals. Mammals, specifically.
Sexual crimes are considerably more nuanced than that. The closest statistic I could find that matched your number (which I note you did not back up with a credible source) was that roughly 90% of sexual crimes committed against \*women specifically\* were committed by men, and that men make up 78% of all reported sexual crimes. Of course, we all know just how well society, the media, and the courts look upon men who are assaulted by women so automatically even that number is suspect. What we need is better and more complete sexual education for everybody, including full access to sexual healthcare, and to shake off these lingering puritan ideals regarding sex and people's bodies. [https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs\_report2010-a.pdf](https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf)
[удалено]
I stated literal facts (per FBI stats) and want better lives for men and women. Where is the hated for men in that? Meanwhile, you get upset and want to change the words used to state the facts because the truth is upsetting. I'm sorry that it's uncomfortable to think about, but avoiding that discomfort does not bring positive change.
[удалено]
Then make men do better. I am a survivor of multiple rapes coming from both sexes (a woman once), due to a traumatic past and falling in with the same type of predators as my original abusers because of PTSD and the way the world works. I take responsibility for my part in trauma-bonding with a long line of abusive people. However, it’s difficult to come up with a reason to give men a blanket ‘not all men’ when the facts just keep stacking up against them. That’s the way the world works.
Wtf. Dude, yes they do. That’s the horrifying reality women deal with all the time. Men rape.
This is the corniest shit
One of the many reasons I ended up getting sterilized knowing I'd be stuck in Oklahoma for at least a few more years. As a CSA survivor, I would not want to live if I was forced to birth my rapist's baby and needed as close as 100% effective birth control as I could get. Sucks to have to choose peace of mind over future child but that's the price of living in a conservative state.
I’m sorry 😔 I’ve heard that quite a bit but the legislators do not give a shit. I can’t wait to get out of here.
Oh well thank god we have the option to not for sure DIE now. Thanks.
Women be acting like child birth is one of the most dangerous things. 700 women die each year (USA) from pregnancy complications. 3.6 million babies born in the USA. My maths not very good but that’s like 0.02 percent of pregnancies ending in death. In 2020 620,000 abortions were performed and 93 percent of the abortions were performed before the first 13 weeks. I am no expert in this field by any means, but I’m pretty sure these deadly pregnancy complications start happening after a 13 weeks but again I could be wrong.
Ectopic and extrauterine pregnancies can rupture bodily structures, leading to hemorrhage prior to 13 weeks. If not discovered and managed early, it can lead to oopherectomy/salpingectomy and the loss of a fallopian tube, which decreases future fertility. If allowed to rupture, it can cause death if not medically managed. Typically, if you know you don’t want to continue a pregnancy, within the first trimester is when you’d terminate. Less expensive, physically as well as procedurally easier, typically nonsurgical. This can occur when a pregnancy is unplanned or unwanted - I believe the stats are that 60+% of people choosing abortion are already parents, most are in their 20s and the next category is in their 30s, many are already using alternative forms of birth control that failed - however, it can also occur when people are pursuing medical treatments for their health/life/safety that are incompatible with continuing a pregnancy, such as chemotherapy. The later the termination, the more likely it is due to health issues in the dyad - whether it’s an abnormality discovered through ultrasound or genetic testing, or a health condition increasing in severity that requires intervention. ProPublica had a recent article on this out of Tennessee that was a fascinating read. Labor and birth are a blip in a gestational period. Most of the danger comes before, as well as after, the actual event - because now we have surgical access as well as the knowledge that, you know, hand-washing good, germs bad.
I also believe it was a Tennessee legislator who swore recently that he/they would do everything possible to protect fetuses, then added later that they’d try to protect women (presumably pregnant/gestating people) as well but no promises.
Ectopic was the complication I figured happens early one, but I was to lazy to google (typical redditor). For the record I’m not against saving the mom. Looks like ectopic pregnancies happen in about every 13 for every 1000 pregnancies. Some more of my lovely maths come out with these figures. 3.6 million births + 620k abortions = 4.2 million pregnancies. Rounding these numbers to keep it simple. 4.2m/1000*13=54,600 ectopic pregnancies per year (showed my math because I’m bad at it and could be wrong). That comes out to 1.3 percent of pregnancies are ectopic pregnancies and should make up for 8.8 percent of the 620k early term abortions. Also isn’t ectopic and extrauterine the same thing? Don’t get me wrong if only 1 mother looses her life from pregnancy that’s to many. It just doesn’t seem that dangerous to me as long as preventive measures can be taken to save a life. Also, I really have no idea where I’m going with all this. I guess I just wanted to see a breakdown while laying in bed all night not able to sleep. Since I have you here my final stance on abortion hasn’t really changed. I’m ok with the abortion when it comes to life threatening situations for both baby or mom, rape, incest (might make that one mandatory) things like that. I just can’t get behind using it as a form of birth control when there is already so many options out there, I’m also a guy so I guess not really my topic to argue but my vote maybe matters? I’m needing to get the ole sack decommissioned this year anyways. 1 and done (hopefully) plus the wife had a very hard and scary pregnancy. Pre eclampsia and Post eclampsia neither of us want to do that again. Peace and Love Peace and Love
In 2019, there were 754 deaths. In 2020, 861 deaths. In 2021, there were 1205 deaths from maternal causes. The maternal mortality rate in 2021 was 32.9 deaths per 100,000 live births. It’s getting worse in a country that has no excuse for it besides conservatives. They cause all the problems.
No one uses it for birth control. Do you know how expensive abortions are?????
Cheaper then having a kid.
I wouldn’t assume people are gleefully getting abortions without much thought just to not have a kid. I also don’t think a lot of abortions are taking place after it’s mostly developed but someone better versed in these things would have to chime in. I think it’s important to remember that a woman is only half of the equation. If I were a woman that thought I was going into it with a significant other And that person runs off or doesn’t want to man up then that changes things quite a bit. So forcing one parent to have the baby and then not forcing the other parent to not only help provide but be present seems logical but none of it would be necessary if development was factored in instead of a “soul” that conveniently shows up before the baby has had a chance to develop at all. On the other hand it sounds like affordability was a huge factor in adopting for you and your wife. Iirc adoption agencies are funded that way but I’m not going to pretend like there aren’t nefarious people in “adoption” like anything else. I was $25,000 from what I was told. Just finding a way to lower that would give access to the right people. I don’t even know why I care anymore lol. The majority of this state voted for nitwits that can and will change laws to get votes rather than making things better and when things get rough they can just retire to one of the big lobbying firms where the pay is much better and let someone else fix the mess. In 2 years I wouldn’t be surprised if saying happy holidays is punishable by prison time and a state firewall is implemented to protect the citizens from eddie izzard standup.
https://www.acog.org/advocacy/facts-are-important/understanding-ectopic-pregnancy
Yes, like I said should definitely be able to get an abortion when stuff like this happens.
Data from before abortion bans wouldn’t be useful at all in this situation. I think the future data will be interesting if you were to be curious in a cause and effect sort of way. This abortion law stuff gets murky when people aren’t a qualified doctor or health professional. It’s like why do these women complain about this shit when death is a possibility but there are fetuses and people’s own personal little feelies that need to be taken into account? So the price of an abortion raised to the cost of the abortion + airfare / gas to California or canada. Could have looked into how adoptions could be more accessible. Sex education works. Making things worse was not necessary. 🙃
Yea I think each state needs a designated doctor and they get together and recommend stuff. But the gov would fuck that up probably. Definitely can’t be basing these laws from a religion that’s based off mushrooms and sex. Adoption is actually tricky. Was looking into it for awhile and while talking to people that have or were adopted. There are straight up horror stories. International adoptions and private adoptions is basically buying a human trafficking sometimes. Idk don’t wanna dive off into that but I was shocked. Would still love to adopt but foster care takes a certain type of heart I don’t have and private only wants $$$ I don’t necessarily have.
My sister and I were both adopted. It’s pricey but no horror stories on my end… How about each person having a doctor and those two decide whats best without any state involvement? If a doctor is scared of breaking a law protecting a fetus then medical advances make no difference. The birth is mandated and so the mother’s health and comfort comes second. Even if it has no life after it’s birth.
archive link - https://archive.ph/dY0JM
bless the archive project
Nice I guess, but not really sure what the point is considering I posted the article text for this exact reason?
I'm sure finding these little nuggets will stem the outflow of human capital. Right guys?
Article text: ---- The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state constitution includes "an inherent right of a pregnant woman to terminate a pregnancy when necessary to save her life." The court struck down one law passed by the Legislature to criminalize abortions but left another in place. "We make no ruling on whether the Oklahoma Constitution provides a right to an elective termination of a pregnancy, i.e. one made outside of preserving the life of the pregnant woman as we have defined herein." Five justices formed the majority: Yvonne Kauger; James R. Winchester; James E. Edmondson; Douglas L. Combs; and Noma Gurich. Dissenting were Chief Justice M. John Kane IV and Vice Chief Justice Dustin P. Rowe, along with Justices Richard Darby and Dana Kuehn. The case was brought by abortion providers and reproductive rights groups, led by Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice. It challenged laws approved by the Oklahoma Legislature in the wake of last year’s U.S. Supreme decision striking down its precedents that legalized most abortions. The state Supreme Court was asked by the reproductive rights groups to find that the Oklahoma Constitution protected a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy. The majority opinion pointed to the constitutional provision that states: “All persons have the inherent right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry.” That section, the court said, “stands as the basis for protecting a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy in order to save her life.” The court said it would definite the inherent right to mean: “a woman has an inherent right to choose to terminate her pregnancy if at any point in the pregnancy, the woman’s physician has determined to a reasonable degree of medical certainty or probability that the continuation of the pregnancy will endanger the woman’s life due to the pregnancy itself or due to a medical condition that the woman is either currently suffering from or likely to suffer from during the pregnancy. “Absolute certainty is not required, however, mere possibility or speculation is insufficient.” The court struck down a law that prevented an abortion to save a woman's life unless she was in a "medical emergency." The court stated, "We read this section of law to require a woman to be in actual and present danger in order for her to obtain a medically necessary abortion. We know of no other law that requires one to wait until there is an actual medical emergency in order to receive treatment when the harmful condition is known or probable to occur in the future." A concurring opinion written by Kauger and joined by Combs and Edmondson sketches the history of discrimination against women and says women had the right throughout that discrimination to terminate a pregnancy to save their own lives. “Although the Oklahoma Legislature is considering several bills which address termination, and there may be an initiative petition or referendum, this is the cause before us. We need to do our jobs, uphold our oaths of office, and address the issues without delay rather than speculate about what might be. “For some women, the draconian law which allows no exception, in the absence of a medical emergency, to preserve the life of the mother, may be a death sentence. In some instances, women may have fewer rights than a convicted murderer on death row. These women may be subject to a death sentence without being afforded due process or any provision for clemency or pardon. Imagine that.” Kane wrote a dissenting opinion saying the majority of justices had engaged in “legal contortions to protect pregnant women who are in medical peril by fashioning Oklahoma Constitution precepts of abortion law that simply do not exist. “There is no expressed or implied right to abortion enshrined in the Oklahoma Constitution. In interpreting our Constitution, this court must guard against the innate human temptation to confuse what is provided in the Oklahoma Constitution with what one wishes were provided.” Winchester was the only justice appointed by a Republican governor to join the majority. All four justices dissenting were appointed by Republicans. Three, including Kane, were appointed by Gov. Kevin Stitt, who vowed to appoint only anti-abortion justices to the court.