So was I!!!

I didn't describe it...because I've never mentioned it!

I didn't say ONE WORD on ultrasound in this whole thread...The ONLY thing I've talked about was the actual abortion.

I said this earlier in the thread...

How could you think I was talking about an ultrasound?!?!?!

An ultrasound doesn't do that...Showing the ACTUAL ABORTION does!...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Ok then...But considering that everyone else here was actually talking about the ultrasounds and the call to make it mandatory where abortion is concerned...Why are you trying now to seperate the two topics?

I thought you were talking about ultrasounds, cause this thread was about ultrasounds and whether or not it should be mandatory or not in regards to abortion...

And so far, all your responses seem to agree that it be mandatory. Because you say that it is just another way to inform women about having an aborition...That's how you've been reading.

Guess you just weren't on the same page everyone else was on eh? LOL...

Well, since you guys are now debating (in part) what I was saying, let me clarify my position.

I think that a woman at a clinic to have an abortion should have optional access to ANY and ALL information that she may want.

And rather than remain silent unless the patient asks for information, I think it would be a very good idea if the doctor were to be proactive and ask the patient: "Would you like to see an ultrasound?" and "Would you like more information/detail on the abortion procedure?"

If the woman is interested in either or both, they should be provided.

This goes even beyond the doctor asking a more general question like "What questions do you have before we get started?" Some women do not know what questions to ask, so I think a little guidance is perfectly appropriate.

I draw the line at forcing anything on the woman that she does not consent to. I think the woman should be exactly as informed as SHE WANTS TO BE. (And NOT as informed as anyone else might wish her to be.)

I have no doubt there are many cases where the woman does not want additional information, and I see no medical reason why those details should be forced upon her. As I said before, this is likely to be the most stressful thing this woman does in her lifetime. Why make it MORE stressful by forcing the woman to give up the little bit of control she has over the situation?

I will agree with something cnredd said. "Pro-choice should mean that even if 100% of women stopped having abortions, they'd still be pleased as long as the CHOICE IS AVAILABLE..."

That is indeed what that should mean. Bill Clinton said it best when he said abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. While we are at it, Planned Parenthood's line says that they are working toward a world where every child born is wanted and loved.

I am as pro-choice as they come. But if the number of abortions (both legal and "back alley") in this country and around the world to drop off to zero because there was no longer such a thing as an unwanted/unplanned pregnancy, nothing would please me more.

I hope that clarifies things.

It's not mandated that I see or hear details of an appendectomy before having one. Cosmetic surgery recipients aren't made to sit through the details of the surgery before having it. Neither are you required to have the details of a heart procedure spelled out to you before its done.

Why are you applying a different mandate to abortion?

glsdhfgkjhfdgs...

sdkjgdsfjhglsdhf....

cjxbvgkjfgjkashdfjh...(cnredd holds up his finger as if to say "wait")...

PHATUIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's better...

Now that I've gotten YOUR WORDS out of my mouth, why don't I just reply with what I'VE ACTUALLY SAID previously...

Nope...

Don't see me limiting it to abortion there...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I need to share how this came across to me... A person that MUST have a procedure should not be given all of the information, but a person who can choose not to have a procedure SHOULD be given all of the information. I'm sure that this is not what you were saying, so I'll ask you to elaborate.




I'll use an example from my own life to illustrate...

A while back, my doctor sent me for an ultrasound on my kidneys because I was suffering a lot of back pain. It was not REQUIRED that I veiw the images that the technician was taking. I asked to veiw them since I have some knowledge and know what I was looking at. If I had no idea of what a sick kidney looked like as opposed to a healthy one, veiwing such scans would not have been of much use.

The same is true of elective procedures. I agree that the best information should be given, but REQUIRING the person to look at scans that they may not understand and may have no interest in seeing benefits no one. I think that veiwing scans and/or details of a procedure should ALWAYS be optional.

Does that make sense?

Sure!...

When deciding on whether or not a procedure should take place, the person who should have the necessary information should be the person making the ultimate decision...

When a patient needs a procedure done(new kidney, appendictomy, inserting screws and plates in broken bones) the patient is NOT the one making the final decision...Who is?...The doctor...He should know the situation best...

Should the doctor have the necessary information needed since he's making the decision?...Absolutely!...

Now let's do elective surgury...

When a patient wants a procedure done(nosejob, pectoral implants, abortions, liposuction), the doctor is NOT the one making the final decision...Who is?...The patient...He should know the situation best...

Should the patient have the necessary information needed since he's making the decision?...Absolutely!...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

okay... Now I must absolutely disagree with you.

An adult should have every right to refuse a life saving measure if they do not want it. Some refuse for personal resons, some for religious reasons some for whatever. I think that both types of procedures should have the same level of information.

That's a different discussion for a different day...

If people didn't want to have a kidney transplant or some other NON-ELECTIVE procedure for personal or religious reasons, they STILL had to find out the situation...

In ELECTIVE procedures, the person alrady knows the situation (weight, pregnant, hooked-nose) before they even bother going to the place they're considering (cosmetic surgury office, abortion clinic)...

Don't make a farce out of the use of the word "elective"...

If, as you say, "An adult should have every right to refuse a life saving measure if they do not want it.", than that means that ALL prodecures become "elective"...

You know better than that...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

I'm stuck on the suggestion that a person that is facing a life saving measure should be given less information than a person facing non-life saving surgery.

That is bugging the hell out of me....

I think that I'll try to stick specifically to abortion on this...

If a woman has a 90+% chance of death if she tries to carry a pregnancy to term, I would consider the abotion as a life saving measure as would most people...

Do you believe that this woman should be given less information about the abortion procedure than a woman who chooses to terminate a pregnancy for other reasons?