Sure, as long as it is someone else who is making the decision on whether or not the abortion can take place. However, if the person is unqualified to PERFORM the abortion, then it will go quite wrong. I can only assume that this law only allows these less qualified people (physician's assistants, nurse practitioners or nurse midwives) to perform abortions under the direction of a doctor. There's nothing to suggest that this law permits physician's assistants, nurse practitioners or nurse midwives to handle an abortion process alone from the initial consultation all the way through to procedure. Is that actually what you were thinking?
I wasn't saying they were unqualified to perform it, I was saying that they were unqualified to determine if it was for appropriate health reasons.
You are talking about it but that is off topic as the legislation has nothing to do with late term abortion
Well you said "homeless person off the street." I assume that you weren't referring to a former abortion doctor who is now homeless, but rather you were using that as an example of someone who is unqualified - Is that right?
I was drawing an analogy to low level abortion workers. If they 'get in trouble', they have relatively little to lose. Unlike a doctor who actually went through years of school and training, and will basically have his entire life ruined if he loses his license. And the doctor will be assumed to have known better, so he can be held responsible. It's just a totally different level of professionalism. The way I see it, we might as well have do-it-yourself abortion clinics, like those do-it-yourself car washes. Post a list of rules on the wall and expect people to follow them. Chris, do you understand what I am saying?
Well yes, but again, there's nothing to suggest that this law permits "low level abortion workers" to handle the abortion process alone from the initial consultation all the way through to procedure. Is that actually what you were thinking?
You're very ill-informed about how the whole thing works. Even during a normal abortion at a clinic, the woman barely sees the doctor. The doctor's time is very valuable. They have low level workers prep the women until the last moment when the doctor walks into the room, does his thing, and immediately leaves as soon as it is all over and pops into another room with another woman to do the same thing all over again. Rarely ever is there an initial "consultation" with a doctor at these clinics. Once you take the doctor out of the procedure itself, you've pretty much practically taken the doctor out of the whole picture.
Well note that I didn't even mention the word "doctor." My point still applies then - there's nothing to suggest that this law permits "low level abortion workers" to handle the abortion process ALONE from the initial consultation all the way through to procedure. NOT ALONE doesn't mean WITH a doctor, it can just mean WITH someone who is more qualified than them who can make the decision on whether the abortion can be performed, and then the lower level worker performs the abortion. Now whether that's a good thing or not I don't know enough to comment on and I'm sure that it's up for debate.
Maybe you are unfamiliar with the word.... Infanticide: the crime of killing a child within a year of birth.
If the doctor/practitioner feels an u/s is necessary, then he/she can order one.However, it should not be mandated by government.
How about if they do order an ultrasound, the woman should see it? At least it should be mandated she should be offered the chance, unless she verbally objects and refuses to see.
It's up to the woman if she "should" see it or not.....certainly not up to the government... Everyone is offered the chance to see their medical tests results....NO one is forced to see them.
MASSIVE deflect. A non-sequitur. The ultrasound in this case does not constitute "medical test results". What are you even talking about? Are you okay with the doctors having to show her, unless she doesn't want to?
FoxHastings said: ↑ It's up to the woman if she "should" see it or not.....certainly not up to the government...
Most of VA needs to just join WV already. Let the urbanites build their progressive leftopia in their dense little corner without dragging the rest of the state with em.
I didn't say she should have to look at the test results. I just suggested that the doctor should have to show her. Where he won't be allowed to ask her whether she wants to see them, he will just say "Now we're going to show you", and only if she responds (on her own accord and initiative) that she doesn't want to see would they not show her.
WHAT TF do you NOT get about the FACT that doctors must offer to show patients test results, or anything pertaining to their medical conditions. And NO patients is obligated to look at them. It is very SIMPLE...try harder...
You're obviously not aware that it's the norm for them not to show the woman the ultrasound in this situation. In fact, it would be very rare for them to offer to. (But all the more astonishing, in this thread we're talking about a non-doctor doing the procedure, presumably that doesn't make any difference here to you)