Confusion about Medical Emergencies - Revision history

DaveLeach at 17:21, 1 November 2024

2024-11-01T17:21:37Z

DaveLeach at 17:18, 1 November 2024

2024-11-01T17:18:09Z

DaveLeach at 17:13, 1 November 2024

2024-11-01T17:13:50Z

DaveLeach at 16:28, 1 November 2024

2024-11-01T16:28:48Z

DaveLeach at 16:18, 1 November 2024

2024-11-01T16:18:05Z

DaveLeach: Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |Forum (Articles) |Offer |Partners |Rules |Tips |
2024-11-01T16:12:09Z

Created page with "{| class="wikitable" |Forum (Articles) |Offer |Partners |Rules |Tips |[[Forum]] (Articles)
|[[Offer]]
|[[Partners]]
|[[Rules]]
|[[Tips]]
|[[FAQ]]
|[[Begin!]]
|'''[https://family-music-center.square.site Donate]'''
|}

[[File:TrustJesusTransparentSmall.gif|right]]      This article was started by [[User:DaveLeach|Dave Leach R-IA Bible Lover-musician-grandpa]] ([[User talk:DaveLeach|talk]]) 16:02, 29 October 2024 (UTC). To help finish it:
----
(1) click "edit" in the left sidebar to see the codes used in this article. (2) type four dashes (to create a horizontal line) after the point with which you will interact. Hit "enter" to start a new line. (3) Type four tildes to "sign" your name. (4) Comment, criticize, clarify, amplify, like, rate, argue, write a poem, etc. To vote, change your previous coment, add a section with a heading that appears in the Table of Contents, start a new article, use colors, write in Greek, post a picture, etc. find suggestions and codes at [[Begin!]] (5) Use "enter" to double space between paragraphs. When finished, type another four dashes on the next line down, then scroll down and click "show preview", and if that looks good, "save changes".
---- 



[[File:SinTiny.gif|center]]

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 That accusation is "going around", I learned Monday, October 28, while doorknocking for State Representative Eddie Andrews.
-I asked Eddie about it later. He said Republicans have done the opposite: after consulting doctors for the law language most favorable to their freedom from liability, they made it so doctors are free from legal scrutiny by simply stating that in their reasonable judgment there is a "medical emergency". Republicans regard that as an easily abused loophole, but they are willing to suffer it for the benefit of doctors.
+I asked Eddie about it later. He said Republicans have done the opposite: after consulting doctors for the law language most favorable to their freedom from liability, they made it so doctors are free from legal scrutiny by simply stating that in their reasonable judgment there is a "medical emergency". Republicans regard that as an easily abused loophole, but they are willing to suffer it for the benefit of doctors. Also considered undoubtedly was removing any ammo for a courtroom attack on its "constitutionality".
 My wife heard the same point made on WHO radio the same day, although she doesn't remember who made it.
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 I checked the bill and the law. Sometimes one may understand how two opposite reports flew out from the same source, by actually reading the original source.
-HF 732 is this year's bill. It certainly seems to erase all liability from any doctor claiming that in his "reasonable judgment" there is a "medical emergency". However, if you think risk of "psychological harm" is good reason to kill a baby, you will think the law severe. A doctor could still escape liability by alleging a risk of ''physical'' injury, but he would have to lie.
+[https://www.legis.iowa.gov/publications/search/document?fq=id:1376982&q=abortion HF 732] is this year's bill. It certainly seems to erase all liability from any doctor claiming that in his "reasonable judgment" there is a "medical emergency". However, if you think risk of "psychological harm" is good reason to kill a baby, you will think the law severe. A doctor could still escape liability by alleging a risk of ''physical'' injury, but he would have to lie.
 THE DETAILS:

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:18, 1 November 2024
Line 54:		Line 54:
	reasonable medical judgment, a medical emergency or fetal heartbeat exception exists.'''		reasonable medical judgment, a medical emergency or fetal heartbeat exception exists.'''

−	b. Notwithstanding paragraph “a”, if a physician determines that the probable	+	b. Notwithstanding paragraph “a”, if a physician determines that the probable postfertilization age, as defined in section 146B.1, of the unborn child is twenty or more weeks, the physician shall not perform an abortion upon a pregnant woman when it has been determined that the unborn child has a detectable fetal heartbeat, '''unless in the physician’s reasonable medical judgment the pregnant woman has a condition which the physician deems a medical emergency, as defined in section 146B.1, <u>or the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of an unborn child.'''</u>
−	postfertilization age, as defined in section 146B.1, of the unborn child is twenty or more
−	weeks, the physician shall not perform an abortion upon a pregnant woman when it has been
−	determined that the unborn child has a detectable fetal heartbeat, '''unless in the physician’s
−	reasonable medical judgment the pregnant woman has a condition which the physician deems a medical emergency, as defined in section 146B.1, <u>or the abortion is necessary to preserve the life of an unborn child.'''</u>

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 That accusation is "going around", I learned Monday, October 28, while doorknocking for State Representative Eddie Andrews.
-I asked Eddie about it later. He said Republicans have done the opposite: after consulting doctors for the law language most favorable to their freedom from liability, they made it so doctors are free from legal scrutiny by simply stating that in their medical judgment there is a "medical emergency". Republicans regard that as an easily abused loophole, but they are willing to suffer it for the benefit of doctors.
+I asked Eddie about it later. He said Republicans have done the opposite: after consulting doctors for the law language most favorable to their freedom from liability, they made it so doctors are free from legal scrutiny by simply stating that in their reasonable judgment there is a "medical emergency". Republicans regard that as an easily abused loophole, but they are willing to suffer it for the benefit of doctors.
 My wife heard the same point made on WHO radio the same day, although she doesn't remember who made it.
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 I checked the bill and the law. Sometimes one may understand how two opposite reports flew out from the same source, by actually reading the original source.
-HF 732 is this year's bill. It
+HF 732 is this year's bill. It certainly seems to erase all liability from any doctor claiming that in his "reasonable judgment" there is a "medical emergency". However, if you think risk of "psychological harm" is good reason to kill a baby, you will think the law severe. A doctor could still escape liability by alleging a risk of ''physical'' injury, but he would have to lie.
 [https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/146A.pdf 146A.1] Prerequisites for abortion — licensee discipline
 . As used in this section:
 a. “Medical emergency” means a situation in which an abortion is performed to preserve
-the life of the pregnant woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical
+a. “Medical emergency” means a situation in which an abortion is performed to preserve the life of the pregnant woman whose life is '''endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy,''' but ''not including psychological conditions, emotional conditions, familial conditions, or the woman’s age''; or when continuation of the pregnancy will create a serious risk of substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.
 illness, or physical injury, including a life-endangering physical condition caused by or
-arising from the pregnancy, but not including psychological conditions, emotional conditions,
+b. “Unborn child” means an individual organism of the species homo sapiens from fertilization to live birth.
@@ Line 49: / Line 46: @@
 ....4. “Medical emergency” means the same as defined in section 146A.1
-....6. “Reasonable medical judgment” means a medical judgment made by a reasonably
+....6. “Reasonable medical judgment” means a medical judgment made by a reasonably prudent physician who is knowledgeable about the case and the treatment possibilities with respect to the medical conditions involved.
 prudent physician who is knowledgeable about the case and the treatment possibilities with
-respect to the medical conditions involved.
+E.2 Abortion — fetal heartbeat — exceptions....

@@ Line 21: / Line 21: @@
 Did Iowa Republicans make it harder for doctors to save mothers by aborting their babies during a "medical emergency"?
-That idea is "going around", I learned Monday, October 28, while doorknocking for State Representative Eddie Andrews.
+That accusation is "going around", I learned Monday, October 28, while doorknocking for State Representative Eddie Andrews.
 I asked Eddie about it later. He said Republicans have done the opposite: after consulting doctors for the law language most favorable to their freedom from liability, they made it so doctors are free from legal scrutiny by simply stating that in their medical judgment there is a "medical emergency". Republicans regard that as an easily abused loophole, but they are willing to suffer it for the benefit of doctors.
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 I checked the bill and the law. Sometimes one may understand how two opposite reports flew out from the same source, by actually reading the original source.
-HF 732
+HF 732 is this year's bill. It
-−

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:18, 1 November 2024
Line 18:		Line 18:

	[[File:SinTiny.gif\|center]]		[[File:SinTiny.gif\|center]]
		+
		+	Did Iowa Republicans make it harder for doctors to save mothers by aborting their babies during a "medical emergency"?
		+
		+	That idea is "going around", I learned Monday, October 28, while doorknocking for State Representative Eddie Andrews.
		+
		+	I asked Eddie about it later. He said Republicans have done the opposite: after consulting doctors for the law language most favorable to their freedom from liability, they made it so doctors are free from legal scrutiny by simply stating that in their medical judgment there is a "medical emergency". Republicans regard that as an easily abused loophole, but they are willing to suffer it for the benefit of doctors.
		+
		+	My wife heard the same point made on WHO radio the same day, although she doesn't remember who made it.
		+
		+	I checked the bill and the law. Sometimes one may understand how two opposite reports flew out from the same source, by actually reading the original source.
		+
		+	HF 732
		+	M