Abortion Ban in SD

[Patrick]

Firstly, I didn't start with the photos, but you have to admit that an aborted fetus does resemble a fetus inutero. Many adamant right to lifers like to use photos for shock value alone, to more humanize the fetus. We were asked if we could look at that photo and say that it wasn't a human being or a baby or whatever, other than a fetus. I stated that I agreed that it was once alive and that appeared to be approx a 20 wk fetus. Then I produced a photo of a human being, not a fetus for comparison...I chose a dead one because a photo of a dead fetus was shown. I acknowledged that in my opinion, both were obviously living prior to their demise, the 20wk fetus being a fetus and the dead adult female being a human being. I have never said that a fetus wasn't alive, I just never said that it was a human being at that point. I don't know how else to explain myself, I am not trying to be cryptic. One more thing, it is obvious that this scene in the photo is not a regular hospital setting. You would NEVER see buckets of blood and used instruments lying around. In a medical setting, even the dead deserve and receive more modesty and respect than depicted in those fetus photos..obviously perfect material for abortion center picket signs

Think again. I've seen an abortion clinic. It's not rosey. The pictures actually look better than what you see in real life. It is a bloody mess. Worse than what the pictures show. They open the lady up, crush the baby's head, crack its spine, cut its arms and legs off....it's very very very bloody. And after the procedure, they do leave the tools around. That's part of the clean up process.

I agree that the pictures were graphic and it was in better taste to list links only, but personally, I think many of you pro-choice people don't even have the slightest idea what an abortion looks like, nor do you have any idea what the fetus looks like that's aborted. I'd say those pics are pretty close to reality. As I said, they probably make things look better than reality.

I think you guys need to educate yourself on what actually goes on in an abortion clinic before you make comments. Obviously, you guys are maknig comments without even having first hand knowledge of what the procedure looks like.

[Patrick]

The blastula, etc. has no inherent capacity to become anything either -- it requires a human host. We're distinguishing between different types of steps required in the process towards viability. Conception is no different than gestation -- it's just another process.

You know.....a man that's just had a heart attack and is in the hospital recovering has no inherent capacity to live any longer either....his body requires round the clock treatment with anticoagulants, anti-hypertensive meds, etc. Does that mean the adult with the MI should be left to die? It's the same thought process. The man is dependent on the hospital host.

A baby requires parents to feed it. Otherwise, it will die. So, without parental support, it doesn't have the capacity to become anything either. This it is dependent on a parental host.

Truth is, when we as doctors take the Hypocratic oath, we're making an oath to preseve life, save life at all costs. Abortions and assisted suicide (another topic we've already discussed) violates every oath a doctor makes! He's guilty of violating the very oath he made in order to become a physician. IMO, there's something unethical about that.

[Patrick]

Guys, from now on if you have pictures to post that prove your point, but ride the fence, please just use links. Obviously porn will be deleted no matter the case, but pictures of this nature would probably better be listed as a link. That gives others the option to view them if they choose to. If they don't want to see the graphic nature of the pics, they don't have too. Also, if the pictures are graphic, please put a warning above the links.

Thanks, Patrick, moderator.

[GrandMaMa]

You know.....a man that's just had a heart attack and is in the hospital recovering has no inherent capacity to live any longer either....his body requires round the clock treatment with anticoagulants, anti-hypertensive meds, etc. Does that mean the adult with the MI should be left to die? It's the same thought process. The man is dependent on the hospital host.

A baby requires parents to feed it. Otherwise, it will die. So, without parental support, it doesn't have the capacity to become anything either. This it is dependent on a parental host.

Truth is, when we as doctors take the Hypocratic oath, we're making an oath to preseve life, save life at all costs. Abortions and assisted suicide (another topic we've already discussed) violates every oath a doctor makes! He's guilty of violating the very oath he made in order to become a physician. IMO, there's something unethical about that

Are you a doctor, Patrick?

[Patrick]

Are you a doctor, Patrick?

Almost. I'm working on medical school as we speak.

[GrandMaMa]

Almost. I'm working on medical school as we speak.

That's awesome, and I sincerely mean that. I don't know why you were in an abortion clinic setting and am very curious to know, but I'm sure you and everyone else knows that there are different qualities of all kinds of clinics, abortion clinics included. I don't know just how familiar you are with a surgical setting, but blood is not allowed to just COLLECT in a bucket, and even if there is considerable bleeding, it is suctioned as it comes so that it can be measured and what can't be suctioned, is covered with sterile drapes, layer after layer if necessary. Even the sponges are counted and if the large sponges are soaked, they are either squeezed for measuring or the blood loss is estimated to determine if it needs to be replaced. Now, I don't believe that one can compare an illegal, alley front abortion clinic with a legally regulated, ethical, yes, I said ethical, women's clinic. The photos that you presented are not typical and if you don't know that, then you have had the wool pulled over your eyes. Surgery is inherently not the most appetizing of scenes, that also applies to orthopedic or thoracic surgery as well. In a proper or reputable medical setting, one would never view a complete torso, dead or alive, unless it was being prepared for autopsy, and then, even then, some parts are respectfully draped. When you are referring to Hippocratic Oath taking, are you referring to THE Hippocratic Oath or A Hippocratic Oath? As far as THE Hippocratic Oath, I can agree that it would be hard to reconcile facilitating abortion, but A Hippocratic Oath would hardly be an issue. I am curious as to which you are referring?

[Midtowner]

You know.....a man that's just had a heart attack and is in the hospital recovering has no inherent capacity to live any longer either....his body requires round the clock treatment with anticoagulants, anti-hypertensive meds, etc. Does that mean the adult with the MI should be left to die? It's the same thought process. The man is dependent on the hospital host.

Not quite. It's only the same if you ignore the innate differences between the two. It's even more impossible for you to reconcile these two if you'll reread some of my earlier posts that suggested that the point at which life begins is the point at which the fetus is viable with whatever medical technology is available. At 24 weeks, a fetus won't survive without major medical care, it is, however capable of survival (somewhere in the 40% range). The heart attack patient probably has a considerably higher chance of survival than 40%.

Compare this to say a 15 week old fetus. Chances of survival with any medical treatment are still zero.

Truth is, when we as doctors take the Hypocratic oath, we're making an oath to preseve life, save life at all costs. Abortions and assisted suicide (another topic we've already discussed) violates every oath a doctor makes! He's guilty of violating the very oath he made in order to become a physician. IMO, there's something unethical about that.

Whether it is alive, as discussed before is a matter of opinion. You should know this better than anyone.

[Patrick]

That's awesome, and I sincerely mean that. I don't know why you were in an abortion clinic setting and am very curious to know, but I'm sure you and everyone else knows that there are different qualities of all kinds of clinics, abortion clinics included.

I actually requested to shadow one day in an abortion clinic a few years back.

I don't know just how familiar you are with a surgical setting, but blood is not allowed to just COLLECT in a bucket, and even if there is considerable bleeding, it is suctioned as it comes so that it can be measured and what can't be suctioned, is covered with sterile drapes, layer after layer if necessary. Even the sponges are counted and if the large sponges are soaked, they are either squeezed for measuring or the blood loss is estimated to determine if it needs to be replaced. Now, I don't believe that one can compare an illegal, alley front abortion clinic with a legally regulated, ethical, yes, I said ethical, women's clinic. The photos that you presented are not typical and if you don't know that, then you have had the wool pulled over your eyes.

Actually I'd say the procedures in an abortion clinic aren't very similar to those in a typical surgery setting. I've been in both. Since the baby is being removed and cut apart, there's not as much oversight on what happens the blood. It is clear that the picture Jack posted was real, but the bucket was probably thrown in to make it appear worse.

Surgery is inherently not the most appetizing of scenes, that also applies to orthopedic or thoracic surgery as well. In a proper or reputable medical setting, one would never view a complete torso, dead or alive, unless it was being prepared for autopsy, and then, even then, some parts are respectfully draped.

I don't know. We view the complete torso when preping a guy for surgery.

When you are referring to Hippocratic Oath taking, are you referring to THE Hippocratic Oath or A Hippocratic Oath? As far as THE Hippocratic Oath, I can agree that it would be hard to reconcile facilitating abortion, but A Hippocratic Oath would hardly be an issue. I am curious as to which you are referring?

Upon graduation, all medical doctors are required to take the Hippocratic Oath.

[Patrick]

Whether it is alive, as discussed before is a matter of opinion. You should know this better than anyone.

I think that's the best way to view this issue.

[Patrick]

This is the original Hippocratic oath. It was changed though after Roe. v. Wade.

swear by Apollo the physician, by Æsculapius, Hygeia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgement, the following Oath.

"To consider dear to me as my parents him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and if necessary to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art if they so desire without fee or written promise; to impart to my sons and the sons of the master who taught me and the disciples who have enrolled themselves and have agreed to the rules of the profession, but to these alone the precepts and the instruction.

I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.

To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death.

Nor will I give a woman a pessary to procure abortion.

But I will preserve the purity of my life and my art.

I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.

In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.

All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.

If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot."

[GrandMaMa]

[/B]

I actually requested to shadow one day in an abortion clinic a few years back.

[/B]

Actually I'd say the procedures in an abortion clinic aren't very similar to those in a typical surgery setting. I've been in both. Since the baby is being removed and cut apart, there's not as much oversight on what happens the blood. It is clear that the picture Jack posted was real, but the bucket was probably thrown in to make it appear worse.



I don't know. We view the complete torso when preping a guy for surgery.

[B]

Upon graduation, all medical doctors are required to take the Hippocratic Oath.

Whom did you shadow Patrick and do you feel that one day as a shadow gave you a realistic picture of what a legal, ethical women's clinic is like? Patrick, the term is Fetus. Actually, the whole purpose of a partial birth abortion is to facilitate delivery while saving the mother's life, therefore, the Fetus is manipulated or incised prior to it's expulsion, there would be no reason to, as you state, cut apart the dead fetus once it was outside of the uterus. The bucket was PROBABLY thrown in? That was obvious. Regarding viewing the complete torso during preparation for and during surgery. Unless the surgery itself is related to certain areas that are usually draped, or unless the torso becomes uncovered during transport from the guerny to the operating table, I doubt the statement that you just made. Even if the surgery is performed on areas normally draped, then the remainder of the torso is draped. Also, you need to check your figures before you make statements as fact regarding doctors being required to take the Hippocratic Oath. This statement is not entirely true, as some medical schools do not require it.

[GrandMaMa]

This is the original Hippocratic oath. It was changed though after Roe. v. Wade.

swear by Apollo the physician, by Æsculapius, Hygeia, and Panacea, and I take to witness all the gods, all the goddesses, to keep according to my ability and my judgement, the following Oath.

"To consider dear to me as my parents him who taught me this art; to live in common with him and if necessary to share my goods with him; To look upon his children as my own brothers, to teach them this art if they so desire without fee or written promise; to impart to my sons and the sons of the master who taught me and the disciples who have enrolled themselves and have agreed to the rules of the profession, but to these alone the precepts and the instruction.

I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.

To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death.

Nor will I give a woman a pessary to procure abortion.

But I will preserve the purity of my life and my art.

I will not cut for stone, even for patients in whom the disease is manifest; I will leave this operation to be performed by practitioners, specialists in this art.

In every house where I come I will enter only for the good of my patients, keeping myself far from all intentional ill-doing and all seduction and especially from the pleasures of love with women or with men, be they free or slaves.

All that may come to my knowledge in the exercise of my profession or in daily commerce with men, which ought not to be spread abroad, I will keep secret and will never reveal.

If I keep this oath faithfully, may I enjoy my life and practice my art, respected by all men and in all times; but if I swerve from it or violate it, may the reverse be my lot."

Patrick, Patrick, Patrick, you did it again. You made a statement as fact which is not even in the ballpark with the truth. Roe V Wade was argued on two seperate dates, December 13, 1971 and October 11, 1972
and then the opinion was handed down January 22, 1973. The Hippocratic oath was updated nine years prior by Louis Lasagna in 1964.

[Patrick]

Patrick, Patrick, Patrick, you did it again. You made a statement as fact which is not even in the ballpark with the truth. Roe V Wade was argued on two seperate dates, December 13, 1971 and October 11, 1972
and then the opinion was handed down January 22, 1973. The Hippocratic oath was updated nine years prior by Louis Lasagna in 1964.

Okay, you're right. But, even the new Hippocratic Oath, without mentioning abortion, says we shouldn't play God.

[Patrick]

Whom did you shadow Patrick and do you feel that one day as a shadow gave you a realistic picture of what a legal, ethical women's clinic is like?

Larry Burns in Norman. I'd say yes to the latter. 1 hour in that clinic would've given me that experience.

Patrick, the term is Fetus. Actually, the whole purpose of a partial birth abortion is to facilitate delivery while saving the mother's life, therefore, the Fetus is manipulated or incised prior to it's expulsion, there would be no reason to, as you state, cut apart the dead fetus once it was outside of the uterus. The bucket was PROBABLY thrown in? That was obvious.

I'd say the bucket was probably thrown in. I have no problem with abortions when they're done to save a mother's life.

Regarding viewing the complete torso during preparation for and during surgery. Unless the surgery itself is related to certain areas that are usually draped, or unless the torso becomes uncovered during transport from the guerny to the operating table, I doubt the statement that you just made. Even if the surgery is performed on areas normally draped, then the remainder of the torso is draped.

You make surgery look more respectful than what it really is. You'd be surprised to see how many jerks there are in a surgery room. That's just the way general surgeons are. It all depends on the surgeon though. The body is only draped during the surgery itself. Before the surgery, the body is actually exposed.

Also, you need to check your figures before you make statements as fact regarding doctors being required to take the Hippocratic Oath. This statement is not entirely true, as some medical schools do not require it.

I actually didn't realize that.

[GrandMaMa]

Okay, you're right. But, even the new Hippocratic Oath, without mentioning abortion, says we shouldn't play God.

1. 1. Patrick, if you are going to quote something, at least use the whole paragraph. It isn't fair to just pick and choose which part of the paragraph to quote, you can't just use the part that proves your statement. Here is the complete quote and you tell me that abortion cannot be considered as mentioned, as well as one most treat the person, not whatever is making the person ill. Also, one has to also consider other pertinent matters, which you may also find in this ACCURATE quote
      
      
      I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.
      
      I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
      
      
      And one more thing, Patrick, I am well aware of the actions of some doctors, but they are the exception. You see, all of them, as well as the nurse's and scrub techs have had a LOT of ethics teaching, and you, on the other hand, obviously have not yet had the pleasure. And no, one hour or one day shadowing anyone, anywhere, not havng to make decisions or not having to participate, cannot possibly provide you with the experience that it takes to afford you the background with which you are making such blatantly false and empty statements. If I appear disrespectful in this post, it's because I am not having much success with subtlety at this point.
      

[GrandMaMa]

This is the original Hippocratic oath. It was changed though after Roe. v. Wade.

Patrick, I just can't believe that you just sort of let this slide by with a mere, "Yeah, you're right". You attempted to illustrte that an opinion handed down would ever have the clout to change the Hippocratic oath, oh yes, in the past, not in the future, as the Hippocratic oath had already been revised several years prior. If you don't know something to be a fact, you might either research it or couch it as your opinion or you think.

[Patrick]

Patrick, I just can't believe that you just sort of let this slide by with a mere, "Yeah, you're right". You attempted to illustrte that an opinion handed down would ever have the clout to change the Hippocratic oath, oh yes, in the past, not in the future, as the Hippocratic oath had already been revised several years prior. If you don't know something to be a fact, you might either research it or couch it as your opinion or you think.

I admitted I was wrong. What else do you want me to do?

[Patrick]

And by the way, changing opinions over time is what did change the Hippocratic Oath:

Modern relevance

Several parts of the Oath have been removed or re-worded over the years in various countries, schools, and societies as the social, religious, and political importance of medicine has changed. Most schools administer some form of oath, but the great majority no longer use the ancient version, which praised pagan gods, advocated teaching of men but not women, and forbade general practitioners from surgery, abortion, euthanasia, or abuse of the prescription pad. Also missing from the ancient Oath and from many modern versions are the complex ethical issues associated with HMOs, living wills, and whether morning-after pills are technically closer to prophylactics or an abortion.
Changed portions of the Oath:

1. To teach medicine to the sons of my teacher. In the past, medical schools would give preferential consideration to the children of physicians. This too has largely disappeared.
2. Not to teach medicine to other people. A physician who has a hand in half-educating quacks or other people not enrolled in an approved medical school would likely lose his or her license even today.
3. To practice and prescribe to the best of my ability for the good of my patients, and to try to avoid harming them. This beneficial intention is the purpose of the physician. However, this item is still invoked in discussions of euthanasia.
4. To never deliberately do harm to anyone for anyone else's interest. Physician organizations in the U.S. and most other countries have strongly denounced physician participation in legal executions.
5. To never attempt to induce an abortion. The wide availability of abortions in much of the world suggests that many physicians no longer feel bound by this.
6. To avoid violating the morals of my community. Many licensing agencies will revoke a physician's license for offending the morals of the community ("moral turpitude").
7. To avoid attempting to do things that other specialists can do better. The "stones" referred to are kidney stones or bladder stones, removal of which was judged too difficult for physicians, and therefore was left for surgeons (specialists). It is interesting how early the value of specialization was recognized. The range of knowledge and skills needed for the range of human problems has always made it impossible for any single physician to maintain expertise in all areas.
8. To keep the good of the patient as the highest priority. There may be other conflicting "good purposes," such as community welfare, conserving economic resources, supporting the criminal justice system, or simply making money for the physician or his employer that provide recurring challenges to physicians.
9. To avoid sexual relationships or other inappropriate entanglements with patients and families. The value of avoiding conflicts of interest has never been questioned.
10. To keep confidential all private patient information. Confidentiality between physician and patient continues to be valued and protected, but governments and third-parties have occasionally encroached upon it.

[Jack]

This is ridiculous. Doctors are supposed to save lives, not take them. Everyone knows that.

[GrandMaMa]

This is ridiculous. Doctors are supposed to save lives, not take them. Everyone knows that.

Are you rewriting the Hippocratic oath now, Jack?

[GrandMaMa]

[QUOTE=Patrick]And by the way, changing opinions over time is what did change the Hippocratic Oath:

And by the way, that is why the decision was handed down regarding Roe Vs Wade..I think it's called, enlightenment.

[GrandMaMa]

I admitted I was wrong. What else do you want me to do?

What do I want you to do? I want you to open your mind, get off your highhorse and use your common sense regarding the subject about which we are supposed to be posting.

[Patrick]

[quote=GrandMaMa]

And by the way, changing opinions over time is what did change the Hippocratic Oath:

And by the way, that is why the decision was handed down regarding Roe Vs Wade..I think it's called, enlightenment.

No, it's because one lady got pissed over the issue, and took her suit to court.

[Patrick]

What do I want you to do? I want you to open your mind, get off your highhorse and use your common sense regarding the subject about which we are supposed to be posting.

That's exactly what I'm doing.

Thanks. Good day.

[GrandMaMa]

[QUOTE=Patrick]

No, it's because one lady got pissed over the issue, and took her suit to court.

So, you're saying that the decision was not even discussed, contemplated or weighed, it was just because some broad decided to take it to court? And just when I thought that you were losing your sense of humor, you come through.